March 11, 2006


"Fort Wayne Professors Redefine Doctrine of Justification"

New and expanded information about the way to heaven was presented at the
2006 Symposiums on Exegetical Theology and the Lutheran Confessions.
(http://www.ctsfw.edu/events/symposia/papers/2006.php)

In addition to teachers and keepers of the faith, a number of professors
write about innovations of the faith, particularly in the Doctrine of
Justification.  The traditional Doctrine of Justification is that a man is
declared righteous by God through faith in Christ alone.

In addressing the Doctrine of Justification, Doctor Arthur Just titled his
paper "'The Elusive Presence': Death of Christ, Gospel, Liberation,
Apocalyptic, Justification, Incorporation into Christ, and New Creation in
Paul's Homily to the Galatians."  There is a title worthy of the layman's
meditation.

After affirming the traditional Lutheran Doctrine of Justification, Just
writes: "It is not clear to me, however, that justification by grace through
faith is the principal doctrine in Galatians." (Page 2)

Luther would be interested to hear Just's discovery of the main in
Galatians.  However, it is one thing to say there is more to Galatians than
justification and it is another thing to say what the "more" is.

Just finds a proof text that there is more to justification in Galatians
when he gets to the fourth last verse of the book. Galatians 6:15 "For Paul,
neither circumcision matters nor uncircumcision, but what matters is - new
creation."

He writes about this verse: "Crucifixion brings in the new creation. No
mention of justification here, for God is not in a courtroom making right
what has gone wrong, but in his creation where the incarnate and sacramental
presence of Christ is continually making all things new." (Pages 26-27)

In other words, the constant process of newness is the main theme of
Galatians and not the Doctrine of Justification.

Just explains: "This apocalyptic invasion is both cosmic and personal, so
that what happens at the cross, where Jesus is making all things right and
all things new, also happens in our baptism where Christ invades us by the
Spirit, and we enter eschatological space (through water in an eight-sided
font), become one with him, and join the heavenly choir. Justification by
grace through faith is what happens to the cosmos as the incarnation reaches
its "telos" at the cross; baptism is what happens to each of us as the
incarnation reaches its "telos" for you in you, for the forgiveness of your
sins, Christ in you." (Page 6)

Perhaps the people in the pew should strap on their safety belts and prepare
for lift off.  We also tend to think of the sinner being justified rather
than the cosmos being justified.

Just prefers the phrase "God's making right what has gone wrong," over
"justify" or "declare righteous." (Page 19)  He also likes L. Martyn's new
word for "justify" which is "rectify" and righteousness as "rectification."
(page 20)  Instead of thinking of themselves as "justified by Christ," lay
people should think of themselves as "rectified."  All of this may require
further scrutiny.

The President of the Seminary, Doctor Wenthe also adds his innovative
comments to the Doctrine of Justification in his paper "Nuances in the
Relationship Between Incarnation and Justification."

Wenthe thinks justification shouldn't be restricted to a "narrow forensic
declaration." (page 5) In other words, he thinks that the cardinal doctrine
of the Reformation doesn't say enough about "Christology".

Wenthe thinks that the Old Testament use of "righteousness" is about, "the
'right' conduct of God and of humans not within a view of ideal norm of what
is right, but rather within the perspective of concrete life relationships
of partners to each other."  (Page 5)  

In other words, instead of finding the gift of God's righteousness, Wenthe
finds what sounds like cooperation between God and man.  Wouldn't Luther be
surprised?  It is hard to talk about "partners to each other" when we are
talking about God declaring us righteous by grace alone through faith alone.
What did we contribute to the partnership?

Again Wenthe says: "How can this be communicated to the faithful so that
'justification' is seen not as abstract legal action, but as the 'lived-out'
response to a real God who is acting in space and time?" 

For most Lutherans "a lived out response" sounds like good works and not
justification.  We wonder how Wenthe finds a "live-out response" in the
Doctrine of Justification.  We assume that he is talking about the Gospel,
even if it sounds like he is talking about sanctification, the third use of
the law.  Any human response is always law.

Dr. Stephen Westerholm, a Reformed theologian, speaking at the Symposium
wrote: "It feels strange indeed to come to a Lutheran seminary to argue that
justification by faith is Paul's answer to how sinners can find a gracious
God." (Justification by Faith is the Anwer: What is the Question? Page 24)

In their papers, Dr. Scaer, Dr. Just, and Dr. Marquart all quote Finnish
theologian Mannermaa.  Mannermaa, as does Just, likes to focus on "Christ in
you." It is true that Mannermaa makes some magnificent statements about
Luther's views of Christ, but it is also well know that Mannermaa appeals to
Osianderanism.

Osiander taught "the indwelling of Christ as a cause of regeneration and
justification." ("Martin Luther as the Mercy of His Interpreters: The New
Helsinki School Critically Evaluated" by Anssi Simojoki 2001 Congress on the
Lutheran Confessions" page 131)


"In 1549 Osiander began publicly to propound a doctrine in which he
abandoned the forensic conception of justification by imputation of the
merits of Christ. . ." (Bente page 152)

Chemnitz shows how Osiander wanted to avoid the forensic definition of
justification in the Old Testament in his ("Loci Theologici" Vol. II page
479 CPH translated by Preus)

We are justified because of God's declaration of our righteousness based on
the merits of Christ's work on the cross, not because of Christ's indwelling
us.  From the cross Christ said, "Father, forgiven them" not "Father, I am
in them."

It is time for the Fort Wayne Faculty to say that it does not agree that the
indwelling of Christ is the cause of our justification, but a result, the
fruit of Justification.  Of course, this will force Fort Wayne to retreat to
the traditional forensic court room definitions that Wenthe, Just, and
Mannermaa want to avoid.

The Doctrine of Justification applies to Christ speaking about the
forgiveness of sins in the Lord's Supper.  We also have to ask, "What is
this new teaching at Fort Wayne about the Lord's Supper?"  If they are
saying that the consecrated elements are more than the body and the blood of
Christ, this new teaching is old Roman Catholicism.

As Luther, Chemnitz, and Pieper teach, the consecrated elements in the
Lord's Supper do not offer the divine nature or essence, not the deity, the
Spirit of Christ, or the soul of Christ. The Lord's Supper does not give the
whole Christ; not the risen Christ, the glorified body of Christ; or the
Trinity.  Christ says, "You do show the Lord's death until he come," not his
resurrection, assumption, or glorification.  The entire, whole, complete God
died in Christ.  He does not say, "Take eat, this is Me." He says, "Take
eat, this is my Body."  The Body can't be all of Him because He also says,
"Take drink, this is my blood."

The Lord's Supper is Christ's body and Christ's blood which is God's body
and God's blood; life giving food, which is given and shed for the remission
of sins.

The following quotations from papers given at Fort Wayne are so ambiguous or
misleading, if they are not presenting the Catholic position of the whole
Christ in the Sacrament, we wonder what they are saying.

Just writes: "The incarnational and sacramental presence of Jesus Christ is
at the center of Paul's theology - and for many today, even Lutherans, this
presence is elusive. For we sometimes forget --it is about a person - the
very Son of God - whose bodily presence even now justifies." (Page 6)  Does
Just mean the whole Christ is in the Sacrament?

Scaer writes: "The Creator who became incarnate in Jesus becomes one with
the sacramental elements."  ("The Holy Spirit, Sacraments and Other Churchly
Rites" Page 11)  Does Scaer mean the whole Christ is in the Sacrament?

Marquart writes: "Secondly, by faith, and in a special way in the Holy
Supper, we become 'partakers of the divine nature' (II Peter 1:4)!" (The
Sacraments as the Mysteries Page 3) If we receive the divine nature in the
Lord's Supper, doesn't Marquart mean the whole Christ is in the Sacrament?

Just quotes James Swetman on the Lords Supper: "entering into the Christian
Holy of Holies and thus the presence of God available in this life through
the means offered by Jesus' risen body . . ."   (Entering Holiness: The High
Priestly Christology of Hebrews 2005 page 9)  

Again Just quotes Swetman on the Lord's Supper:  "What all this complicated
imagery adds up to seems to be this: that for the addressees the glorified
body of Christ which they come into contact with as the Eucharistic body is
the concrete means given to them by Christ the new high priest of entering
the Holy of Holies, i.e., God's presence." (Entering Holiness: The High
Priestly Christology of Hebrews 2005 page 13)

Swetman is talking about the whole Christ in the Sacrament.  Why is Just
quoting him as a recommended authority?

Chemnitz quotes Justin Martyr, "The body remains body, for the body is not
God."  (Two Natures of Christ page 272)

Athanasius: "Furthermore, a created nature [Christ's body] is by no means
capable of assuming those properties which are peculiar to God." Page 273

Ambrose: "The name of God is not given to the body, for flesh cannot become
God."  (Page 273)  Many more could be quoted.

The Lord's Supper is not the whole Christ, otherwise it should be worshiped
and prayed to just as the Catholic Church worships and prays to the
consecrated elements.  Since God can not be divided they only offer the lay
people the bread.   However, the Lutheran teaching is that Christ is not
given to anyone in the Lord's Supper, rather Christ's body and blood are
distributed in the Lord's Supper.

Scaer also wants to claim the Holy Spirit is in the Lord's Supper.  If we
have the Holy Spirit in the Lord's Supper, isn't He the one, eternal God,
apart from whom there is no other God?  If we consume the Holy Spirit in the
Lord's Supper, haven't we consumed God?

Scaer write: "A common feature in Eastern liturgies is the "epiklesis," the
invocation of the Spirit on the communion elements to make them body and
blood. Since it has no place in Western liturgies and might be seen as
supporting Calvin's view that the Spirit and not Jesus is in the sacraments,
there is reason to exclude it. Putting these reasons aside, its inclusion is
biblically and theologically justifiable (Ap. X 3). ("The Holy Spirit,
Sacraments and Other Churchly Rites" Page 11)

Congratulations to the layman who made it to the end of this article.  Let
me assure you that most of the clergy don't know what Just, Wenthe,
Marquart, and Scaer are talking about.

It is also a sad commentary to note that the current LCMS President is the
weakest theologian ever to hold the office as is the current President of
the LCMS Council of Presidents.  In other words, no one is minding the
store.

The LCMS is in a state of theological collapse.  President Kieschnick even
argues against the statement "that the entire, whole, complete God died in
Christ on Good Friday."  While he tries to set the world "Ablaze" without
the real Jesus and fight off a lawsuit to remove him office, teaching
correct doctrine is not a high priority.

Let the layman beware.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Reclaim News