UOJ, Ohio's great error &… The Lutheran Witness? Part 1 of 2

      Universal, Objective Justification (UOJ) continues to be ignored or misunderstood in today's Lutheranism.  But it was the core teaching of not only Walther, but also the Synodical Conference from its beginning.  One of my more popular blogs presented Pieper's sharp warning in June 1889 against the Ohio Synod and their fall on this foundational Christian doctrine of Justification.  But less than a year later, in March 1890, another sharp warning appeared against the changing Ohio Synod and its Lutheran Standard magazine, this time in the English language The Lutheran Witness. The following is the summary section (Google Books, p. 155-156) of one of the finest essays that The Lutheran Witness magazine has ever produced, apart from translations of Walther's German language writings: 

- - - - - - - -  (Summary by author "G. A. M.")  - - - - - - - - - 

Such is the article, a truly wonderful document, in our opinion on the relation of faith towards universal justification. This article voiced the sentiments of the whole Synodical Conference in 1872. In this article our readers are informed: “The sectarians do not simply regard faith as a hand, but as a condition which man must fulfill before he can go to heaven; whereas faith is nothing but an empty hand which God must fill. If we had nothing else but faith, and not Christ (which of course is impossible), we would be damned with all our faith; for not the act of faith, but Christ whom we thereby embrace, makes us pleasing to God. And this is what all fanatics <page 156> overlook. They wish to secure some place for the activity of man, and therefore they now lodge it in man’s faith, now in his penitence, again in his conversion, and yet again in his sanctification,” etc.

But in 1890 the Standard also writes: “Faith is a necessary condition of man’s justification.” In 1872 the Standard in agreement with Synodical Conference stated: “The sectarians regard faith as a condition which man must fulfill before he can go to heaven;” in 1890 the same Standard writes: “Faith is a necessary condition of man’s justification.” In 1872 faith was only an empty hand and no condition; in 1890 faith has become a necessary condition and is no longer an empty hand only. The Standard of 1890 has killed the Standard of 1872. According to its own verdict Ohio has taken its place among sectarians in wishing and working “to secure some place for the activity of man” in conversion, justification and election. Yet, in consummate hypocrisy, the renegades at Columbus charge Missouri with having falsified even the doctrine of justification. The sad truth is, Ohio has changed both its doctrine and morals. G. A. M.

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

Along with the clarion call against the Ohio Synod that this summary displayed, it was also a surprise for me to see it published in English, for it seemed that it was largely the German speaking Missouri theologians who were strong on the Doctrine of Justification.  Unfortunately today's LC-MS theologians, who want to label Old Missouri as "LC-MS", do not teach like the Old (German) Missouri Synod. So why do they promote themselves as Old Missouri?…  Good question.

      Now I will reproduce the full 2-part essay (March 7, March 21) for the full background and narrative, even though it is freely available in Google Books.  In the next Part 2, I present my conclusion on this pivotal doctrine.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

LUTHERAN WITNESS, March 7, 1890,

Polemical.

Ohio in 1872 and in 1890 on Faith and Conversion.

1. ON FAITH.

“Meeting of the Synodical Conference (1872).”

“Christ is the lamb of God who taketh away the sins of the world.” He was the representative of the human race in bearing all men's iniquities, suffering and dying for our sins. When he arose again from the dead, He was pronounced acquitted. This acquittal was again in our stead. In Him all men are absolved. “He was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification.” He died and rose again not only for an elect few, but for all men, and the benefits of the redemption are secured to all. “As by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation, even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.” There is a general justification of the race in Christ as the substitute for all men. The benefits thus secured are brought to men through the means of grace. These are not efficient causes of the blessings bestowed, but channels through which they are conveyed. They bring the gift which is already purchased and secured. Faith is not a condition of the existence of forgiveness for men. It is the means of its appropriation. When absolution is pronounced, it is valid whether men believe it or not. Faith does not make God’s declaration true that our sins are forgiven us. It is made because it is true and faith is to receive it because it is true. Were it not true, unbelief could not be the great sin it is. It is absurd to say that we might believe a thing to be true in order that it may become true and give us comfort. Our comfort might rest upon the truth in itself, which does not become truth by our faith and does not become untruth by our faithlessness. When the truth that our sins are forgiven us in Christ is received we are personally justified by faith and have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. He that believeth not shall be damned, because he rejects the free pardon brought to him through the means of grace. His sin is not that he failed to fulfill conditions under which he might have received forgiveness of sin, but that he has not appropriated the forgiveness offered without money and price.” (L. Standard, Vol. XXX, No. 15, whole No. 820. Aug. 1, 1872, page 116.)

Prof. Matthias Loy
Ohio Synod
"Prof. Toy"

This summary of the discussions of this subject was written by the Editor, “Rev. M. Loy,” and is introduced in these words: “To this subject” (of justification) “the greater portion of the time set apart for this meeting of Conference was devoted, not because there was any diversity of opinion upon it among the members, but because of its paramount importance and also because some not connected with the Conference had disputed essential features of the doctrine.” Now in 1890 this same Standard and this same “Loy” writes, “Faith is a necessary condition of justification.” In 1872 faith was not a condition of the existence of forgiveness of sins. In 1890 it has become a <column 2> necessary condition of justification. Now they teach the very reverse of what they taught twenty years ago in the very article of justification. Now they find a merit of man in his faith or apprehension, formerly faith was to them the God-given hand only whereby man grasps the pardon announced in the gospel of justification. This shows that the Standard has become a Sand-ard, and Rev. Loy a Prof. Toy.

[Read the balance of this article in the "Read more »" section below; Conclusion in Part 2]

Fundament 16: Means 7: Papists’ “infused grace”; LC-MS falsifies Church History

      This continues from Part 15 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a translation of Franz Pieper's essay on the foundation of the Christian faith ("Das Fundament des christlichen Glaubens"). —  What does "grace" mean?  The word itself sounds nice to our ears but it is a much abused word, especially by those who deny the Means of God's Grace – the "enthusiasts" of all kinds.  And Pieper lumps the Papists in the camp of "enthusiasts", as we learn in this segment.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Text preparation and translation by BackToLuther using DeepL, Google Translate, Microsoft Translate, Yandex Translate. All bold text is Pieper's emphasis. All highlighting, red text, and most text in square brackets [ ] is mine.

Das Fundament des christlichen Glaubens.

The Foundation of the Christian Faith.

[by President Franz Pieper, Concordia Seminary; continued from Part 15 - page 256]

Also the Papists are by no means sparing with the use of the word “grace”. They assure us, as often as we want to hear it, that also according to their teachings man becomes righteous and blessed by grace. But they understand by the justifying and saving grace not God's mercy or God's gracious disposition, according to which God forgives sin for Christ's perfect merit—this doctrine is expressly cursed in the Tridentinum—but by “Grace” the Papists understand the so-called “poured in grace” (gratia infusa), that is, a good quality found in man (illis inhaeret); in short, they understand “grace” as sanctification and good works. 86) Also the enthusiasts, if they point away from the external means of grace, cannot understand by “grace” God's graciousness, but only a poured in grace, a good nature or renewal in man, which is worked by the Holy Spirit without means. Why? The reason is this: His graciousness (Luther: “grace or favour”), according to which God forgives our sin or justifies us for the sake of Christ’s satisfactio vicaria, reveals God only in the means of grace ordered by Him and can be believed by us only on the basis of the means of grace. So far as the enthusiasts [the “swarmers”] now set aside the means of grace, they are forced to refer sinners who ask for God's grace to an immediate effective renewal in the heart of man as a basis for confidence in God's grace. But that is a doctrine of works. 

It should not be forgotten that this immediate [or direct] spiritual effect, on which the enthusiasts of Zwingli and Calvin up to Hodge and Shedd lead a poor sinner, only exists in man’s imagination. According to Scripture, we men cannot expect any revelation of grace and any effect of grace besides and beyond the means of grace. “The words that I speak unto you,” Christ teaches us, “they are spirit, and they are life.” (John 6:63) Thus, for a man who has fallen under the treatment of a consistent enthusiast, there is nothing left to do but to produce from himself, from his own natural inner being, such soul moods, states, changes and works, which have an external resemblance to the true product of the Holy Spirit, and to base his faith on them. Luther therefore says of the enthusiasts, when they let the Word (the means of grace) go: 88) “They hold and teach just the same as was taught in the Papacy: that a man who does what is in him is saved.” Thus the setting aside of the means of grace of necessity drifts towards the Roman doctrine of works. The 

-------------- 

85) Sessio VI, can.12.          . 

86) Sessio VI, can.11.

88) St. L. II, 1828. [On Genesis 47:26; Am. Ed. 8, p. 134]

[page 257] 

enthusiasts didn't want this. They wanted the opposite. By reforming the divine revelation and the grace of the Holy Spirit from the “vehicle” of the external means of grace, they wanted to reform better and more thoroughly than Luther, and sweep away the papist leaven that Luther still overlooked. But by replacing the external means ordered by God with an immediate effect of the Holy Spirit in their own carnal wisdom, which does not even exist, they got stuck in the religion inherent in the flesh, the righteousness of works, and returned to the Papist camp as far as the attainment of grace and salvation was concerned. 

So the practical result for papists and enthusiasts, if they remain consistent, is the same, namely doubt and despair of the grace of God, because from the works of the Law no flesh becomes righteous before God. That in the camp of the Reformed fellowships, which officially put in the place of the means of grace an immediate revelation and effect of the Holy Spirit, there are Christians who become and are certain of the grace of God, is only because, as has already been stated, contestation and need of death drive them to the Lutheran standpoint. They leave the sandy ground of an immediate action of the Holy Spirit and take hold of their faith in an external Word of the Gospel that promises them the forgiveness of sins for the sake of the Blood of Christ. Even the famous representatives of the immediate effect of the spirit take up the inconsistency even in their positive doctrinal presentation. Calvin can serve as an example. Although Calvin, just like Zwingli, advocates the axiom that the Holy Spirit does not need a “vehicle”, and even expressly warns against judging God's will of grace against mankind from the general vocation that occurs through the external word (per externum Verbi praedicationem), (Inst. III, 24, 8) he can nevertheless – in contradiction with it – occasionally say: (Inst. III, 2, 6) “The Word is the basis by which faith is supported and preserved; if it deviates from it, it falls away. So if you take away the Word, there is no faith left,” 

so that it is admitted, of course, that the Zwinglian-Calvinist Reformation, to the extent that it was carried out alongside and against Luther's Reformation and was intended to improve it, was actually a pseudo-reformation, a reformation through which the souls were not led to the foundation of the Christian faith, but were led away by it. 

Finally, we remember that in the setting aside of the means of grace by the enthusiasts, a disease appears, [page 258] which we, too, have to combat throughout our lives. What the enthusiasts officially and fundamentally do, namely to make the “poured in grace” [or “infused grace”] the foundation of the Christian faith, is also done by these Christians, who teach correctly about the means of grace and also believe correctly in the rule, often unofficially and in contradiction with their right teaching. They do this as often as in the knowledge of their sin and damnableness they want to base the certainty of God's grace or the forgiveness of their sins on their personal nature, on the feeling of grace, etc., i.e. on the “poured in grace”, instead of on God's promise of grace in the objective means of grace. “We are all born enthusiasts.”  Luther: 91) “Flesh and blood always gropes at other consolations than the Word; for it always wants to have something that it can see and feel and hang on to with senses and reason.” 

= = = = = = = = = = continued in Part 17 = = = = = = = = = =

      Pieper's teaching on the Lutheran doctrine of the Means of Grace is crystal clear and is based on the Holy Scriptures.  Comparatively, today's LC-MS enthusiastic "sacramental theology" wants to exclude the reading of the Word as one of the Means of Grace, thereby distancing themselves from Lutheranism (and Walther), and so end up as Romanizing Lutherans.

      This is confirmed in the massive 2011 CPH/LC-MS book of church history The Church From Age To Age as it refers to the post-Vatican II Roman Catholic Church, p. 844:

“… the long-held Western Christian confession of the Athanasian Creed, which is an official confession for Roman Catholics as well as orthodox Protestant churches. The creed states that only those who worship the Holy Trinity and confess the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ can be saved.”

This affirmation of Roman Catholicism by the LC-MS willfully ignores the Papists' denial of the foundation of Christianity, the Doctrine of Justification. Pieper shows, as do the Lutheran Confessions, that the Roman Catholic Church understands "'grace' as sanctification and good works", and thereby denies the fruit of the Incarnation and Resurrection.  Rome did not overturn their "infused grace" theology in Vatican II, a theology that Luther so earnestly contended against. Is it any wonder that the college textbook Religion in America (4th edition, p. 58) by Unitarian "minister" Rev. Julia Corbett-Hemeyer says the LC-MS is a "consensus religion" and "is now a part of the broad consensus". — In the next Part 17…

Christian Cyclopedia - who are the contributors? (many "Walkouts")

Who are its contributors?

[2023-10-31: fixed broken link to LC-MS Cyclopedia; 2019-12-18: added note on Surburg review in 1977; 2019-11-26: added notes in red below]
      The LC-MS's online Christian Cyclopedia is one of the most comprehensive modern sources of basic Lutheran-Christian information on the web.  Obviously Wikipedia is another source for this information, but many times its "objectivity" does not recognize the authority of the objective Word of God, e.g. Chronology of the Bible. But what about the content of the LC-MS Christian Cyclopedia… does it recognize the authority of Holy Scripture in matters of religion, the Church, and true Church History?  Who are the contributors to its entries? A comparison with its older Lutheran Cyclopedia predecessors shows most of its content is from the 1975 edition. One sees on the opening web page that its editors were "Erwin L. Lueker, Luther Poellot, Paul Jackson".  But could these 3 people be the only contributors?  There is no obvious link from the main web page to a listing of the contributors.  But there is a such a page, one that I found only by accident -- it is >> here [2023-10-31 link broken by LC-MS this year, changed to Wayback] <<, the "Name Abbreviations" page.  There are 249 listed contributors.
      Who are these people?  It is practically impossible to know about them all, but probably most are "LC-MS", with some notable exceptions.  So my desire to research this matter was because of frustration with many of its contributions.  The initials at the end of the articles were the clue to who was injecting an erring opinion in matters of faith.
It became apparent that a significant number of major entries were tainted by Concordia Seminary's professors who were party to the "Walkout" of 1974 and were subsequently locked out of the Seminary.  So I determined to build a cross-reference listing of Cyclopedia contributors who were signers of the infamous 1972 faculty statement Faithful to Our Calling, Faithful to Our Lord, Part II.  Below is my list of the 21 contributors in alphabetical order by their last name.  These are hyperlinked with the following: (1) the full name is hyperlinked to that person's "personal confession" pages in the Faithful to Our Calling statement, and (2) all of their Cyclopedia contributions are listed with hyperlinks to their entry contributions.  For example, the entry for “Fuerbringer, Ludwig” was by Richard R. Caemmerer who tilts his assessment of Fuerbringer towards his weaknesses, even if the article exposes some of the reasons for the Seminary's downfall.

"Walkout" authors and their contributions to the Christian Cyclopedia

[2019-11-26: several correction, Krentz, Lueker]

1. HJAB - Herbert J. A. Bouman: Rule of Faith 
2. RRC (not RRCj)- Richard R. Caemmerer Sr.: Atonement, Capital and Labor, Conscience, God, Ludwig Ern(e)st Fuerbringer, Philosophy of History, Holy Spirit, Homiletics, Humanism, Sixteenth-Century German, Laymen's Activity in the Lutheran Church (RRC in 1954), Luther Renaissance, Lutheran Literature, Philipp Melanchthon,  Social Ethics, Socialism, Temptation., Woman in Christian Society, 
3. RC - Robert L. Conrad: (CTM articles): 
4. JWC - John W. Constable: Roman Catholic Church, The, E 4.
5. JSD - John S. Damm: Orders of Worship, 
6. FWD - Frederick W. Danker: Canon, Bible, Commentaries, Biblical, Manuscripts of the Bible, 3 a, Textual Criticism.
7. WJD - William J. Danker: Primitive Religion.
8. AOF - Alfred O. Fuerbringer: Center for Reformation Research, Ministry, Education of
9. NH - Norman Habel: Law Codes, Canaanites, Religion of, 
10. WK - Wi Jo Kang: Nevius Methods; 
11. EK - Edgar M. Krentz: Clement of Alexandria, Epictetus, Greek Religion, 3 b, Origen, Pantaenus, Roman Religion, Skepticism, Stoicism, 
12. EL - Erwin L. Lueker: Antichrist, Apologetics, II A, Asceticism; Alms, Barmen Theses, Bataks, Bishop; Buber, Martin, Bull, Chinese Philosophy, Common Confession, Concordances, Bible, Confessing Church, Confession, Councils and Synods, Dance, Demythologization, Dialectic, Dilthey, Wilhelm Christian Ludwig, Eastern Orthodox Standards of Doctrine, A 4, Ecumenical Creeds, B, Ego, Elert, Werner, Ethics, Federal Theology, Fellowship, Foot Washing, German Evangelical Church Society of the West, T, Gnosticism, Heresy, Hittites, Hume, David, Immortality, Inspiration, Doctrine of, Kirchenkampf, Malaysia, Martyr, Miracles, Mysticism, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Neo-Thomism, Nonchalcedonian Churches, 2, Pieper, Franz August Otto, Rationalism, Roman Catholic Church; Saints, Veneration of, 7, Secularism, Situation(al) Ethics, World Community of Al-Islam, 
13. DPM - Duane P. Mehl: Youth Work, LCMS
14. HTM - Herbert T. Mayer: Apocalyptic Literature, Apostolic Fathers, 2, Chalcedon, Constantine, Council of, Consensus Quinquesaecularis, Crusades, Eusebius of Caesarea, Intertestamental, Messianic Hope, Pelagius, 
15. CSM - Carl S. Meyer: Altenburg Theses, American Lutheranism, Auburn Affirmation, Bartholomew's Day Massacre, Augsburg, Peace of,  Basel, Council of, Colloquy of Cassel, Church and State, 15,, Collegialism, Council of, Counter Reformation, Thomas Cranmer, Florence, Council of, Government, Government, Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, , 
16. ACP - Arthur Carl Piepkorn: Absolution; Agnus Dei; Altar; Altar Rail; Ambrosian Music; Angels, Veneration of; Apostolic Succession; Johann Arndt; Asceticism; Assumption, Feast of the; Ave Maria; Liturgical Baptism; Bishop; Chemnitz, Martin; Church Year;  Confession; Disciplina arcani; Ethiopic Church; Nonchalcedonian Churches, 2 (ACP, EL); Roman Catholic Church, The, A 8; 
17. ACR - Arthur C. Repp: Catechetics, Chrysostom, John, Confirmation, Protestant Education in the United States, 
18. AvRS - Alfred yon Rohr Sauer: Archaeology, Biblical, Dead Sea Scrolls, 
19. JHT - John H. Tietjen: Ecumenical Movement, 
20. CAV - Carl A. Volz: Schism, 8, Western Christianity 500–1500,  
21. LCW - Leonard C. Wuerffel: ?
22. LW - Lorenz Wunderlich: Adiaphora, Youth Work, 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

The above list is fairly complete even if I may have missed a few entries.  But the primary editor and author of the Cyclopedia, from its 1954 edition to its 1975 edition, to today's Christian Cyclopedia was… Erwin Lueker, a Walkout professor.  I suspect that most unsigned entries were from Lueker in collaboration with other "Walkout" professors, all of whom held a low view of Holy Scripture.  All spiritual and church historical judgments by these contributors are suspect at best.  I use the Christian Cyclopedia along with the 1927 Concordia Cyclopedia of Fuerbringer, Engelder, and P. E. Kretzmann which has better spiritual judgment, e.g. on “Hengstenberg” (cp. here and here). [2019-11-26: Also Lueker's entry for the Iowa Synod makes no mention of its affiliation with the Romanizing Wilhelm Loehe, as the 1927 Cyclopedia does. Even the Wikipedia article mentions Loehe's connection.] Especially offensive is the mixed theology of the bibliography for the entry for "Justification", where Engelder is mixed with known opponents of the Scripture Principle such as the Swedish Aulén and the German Elert, let alone the erring LC-MS theologians Arndt and Hoyer.
- - - - - - - - - -
2019-12-18: Prof. Raymond Surburg († 2001), in a 1977 CTQ Book Review, gave good information on the 1975 Lutheran Cyclopedia, noting the "moderate" changes from Old Missouri similar to my points above. Surburg notes: "With 250 individuals contributing, some of whom are now associated with Seminex and men sympathetic to the so-called moderate theology, it is not surprising that the 1975 revision does not portray the same consistency toward the Bible and its writings as was the case with its predecessors of 1927 and 1954. Hold on to your 1954 version and the 1927 version if you own them or can purchase them."