"A culture hostile to Christianity was, and is, incredibly unlikely to assent to any truth claim predicated on peculiarly Christian presuppositions".

Back To Luther... and the old (German) Missouri Synod. Below are thoughts, confessions, quotations from a Missouri Synod Lutheran (born 1952) who came back to his old faith... and found more treasures than he knew existed in the training of his youth. The great Lutheran lineage above: Martin Luther, C.F.W. Walther, Franz Pieper.
Search This Blog
Thursday, July 3, 2025
L01: Walther (and Luther) on the Law; everyone bound by "natural law"
Monday, June 30, 2025
Franzpieper.com is going away after 25 years; here's a copy
Franz August Otto Pieper-
The 20th Century Luther
Martin Chemnitz has been called the Second Martin, referring to his defense of the doctrines brought to light by the reformer, Martin Luther. C.F.W. Walther has been called the American Luther, clearing away again all hindrance to the glory of the pure Gospel. Now there stands one who cannot be passed over in the lineage of great Lutheran teachers. The place was St. Louis, Missouri, America but more importantly, the doctrine was Lutheran.…. Christian.
The President of Concordia Seminary in St. Louis from the time of C.F.W. Walther’s death in 1887 to the time of his death in 1931, Pieper held the most visible position among orthodox Lutherans during this period. He also held the position of Synod President during a portion of this time. But it was his teaching that makes him stand out. As the 20th Century draws to a close, a survey of all those who were in teaching and leadership positions within the Lutheran Church in American and the world, shows one who stands out - Dr. Franz August Otto Pieper. He taught as the overriding doctrine of Scripture to be the universal/objective reconciliation/redemption/justification of the world. Now it remains for Dr. Pieper to take his place. The Lord knows this epithet will remain. I confess - no one has pressed the kingdom of heaven into my lap more firmly than Dr. Pieper.
After his death, there began considerable controversies over the doctrines as written in the Brief Statement of 1932. In discussions with other American Lutheran church bodies, it was notably the doctrine of the universal will of grace and universal justification that brought contention and actual scorn.
The Norwegian Merger of 1917: A False Charge
This is perhaps the saddest part of this essay. It involves St. Louis professors and also a later Missouri Synod President. It involves the Synod that requested the essay on Justification at the first meeting of the Synodical Conference - the Norwegian Synod (now known as the Evangelical Lutheran Synod).
Rev. Theodore A. Aaberg of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod (Norwegian Synod) in his 1968 book A City Set on a Hill offered an evaluation of the question regarding the advice given by the Missouri Synod professors F. Pieper, W.H.T. Dau, and T. Graebner (pgs 274-282). There would be no question in this matter except the leaders of the Minority then joined the Majority in union with the United and Hauge Synods in 1917 and further said one thing and those who gave the advice said another. The leading spokesman for the Missouri professors was Franz Pieper.
C.K. Preus was the son of the first president of the Norwegian Synod and president of the Synod’s seminary at Decorah, Iowa. I.B. Torrison was a Synod pastor. During a meeting of the Minority pastors of January 17-18, 1917 at the West Hotel, Minneapolis, they said "the letter meant that the ‘Minority’ should not separate itself from the Norwegian Synod but stay and bear witness to the truth and continue so to do as the Synod merged with the other bodies" (J.C.K. Preus, The Union Movement.., p. 9) In this same publication, J.C.K. Preus stated: "One deplorable result was the charge made by a few ‘Minority’ men to the effect that Preus and Torrison had not reported correctly the advice given by the St. Louis professors". C.K. Preus (and J.C.K. Preus, his son) in effect charges Dr. Pieper with giving conflicting advice, between the December 28, 1916 personal meeting and the January 9, 1917 letter. The following is the letter:
Letter of Jan. 9, 1917:
St. Louis, Mo.,
Jan. 9, 1917.
Dear Prof. C.K. Preus
Pastor I.B. Torrison
Decorah, Iowa
Dear Brothers:
We send you, according to your request, the written record of the decision which we arrived at on Dec. 28th during the conversations you asked for.
Concerning the matter which you laid before us, the question is not whether the Minority should enter into the situation as it now is developing in the Norwegian Synod- something we could not advise anyone to do. But the question is whether or not the Minority is compelled for conscience’ sake to step out of the Norwegian Synod, or whether circumstances are still such that further witness for the truth is your duty. Our opinion is:
1. Since it is admitted by the Union Committee that the insistence of the Minority that thesis I of "Opgjor" be eliminated is in agreement with the Scriptures and the Confessions,
2. Since the Union Committee has openly declared that the expression in Thesis IV of "Opgjor" ("the sense of responsibility in regard to the acceptance or rejection of grace") is to be thus understood, that God alone is the cause of acceptance, man alone the cause of rejection,
3. Since silence is not imposed on the Minority, but rather freedom of speech is expressly conceded in regard to "Opgjor",
we believe that the time for the Minority to sever its connection with the Norwegian Synod has not yet come, but that it is much more your duty through your witness to the truth in the Norwegian Synod, if God wills, to bring about its complete recognition.
Respectfully,
[Signed] W.H.T. Dau
F. Pieper
Th. Graebner
This charge is false.
Graebner letter of 1938:
the charge was again made in later years after Pieper’s death by one of the St. Louis professors, Theodore Graebner. The charge is made in a letter by Professor Graebner to Dr. Nils Ylvisaker on November 12, 1938, which follows:
November 12, 1938
Dr. Nils Ylvisaker
425 South Fourth Street
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Dear friend Ylvisaker:
Thursday, June 26, 2025
Pff3: Old Missouri republishes Pfeiffer (another BTL book)
"In 1679 he took a stand against the “fundamental questions against the Lutheran religion” spread by the Jesuit Arnold Engel with his treatise “Lutherthum vor Luther” (Lutheranism before Luther), published several times and recently reprinted."
- In this publication, Latin phrases are used frequently, but are many times followed by an inline translation making it much easier for machine translation into English. Even so, in the many footnotes there are no inline translations of the Latin, so I inserted the Google Translate text in many cases. Unfortunately this machine translation of Latin is at times choppy and not always easy to follow.
- A "Table of Contents" with hyperlinks was added to greatly enhance navigation and understanding.
- Every page number is linked to its respective page in the original publication for ease of comparison and review.
- It should be noted that there is a play on the word “Engel” which is both the Jesuit priest's name and the German word for “angel”.
- The section on pages 194-216 was unclear to me at first as to who was writing, Pfeiffer or Father Engel. After reading it, it appears to be Engel's sarcastic mocking of Pfeiffer, perhaps putting words in his mouth, a typical tactic of papists. There are copious footnotes on each page which were clearly written by Pfeiffer refuting the points made by Father Engel.
Sunday, June 22, 2025
Pff2: Evangelical doctrine, “defend to the death”; Harrison a “deceitful peacemaker”?
“As I perused the Catechism of the Catholic Church for contemporary documentation of positions of the Roman Catholic Church which Walther addresses and which are the object of Lutheran polemic, I noted numerous points of remarkable convergence of Lutheran and Roman Catholic doctrine on the Office of the Ministry. While we must reject what is false, we can also joyously note what is right—no matter who says it.”
Thursday, June 19, 2025
Handel died a Christian
I am certain in my faith,Which incorporates me in Christ.Who can rob me of this treasure,Which his blood and death pledge to me?His precious Word confirms this,Therefore my faith says: "I am certain." —
"O, it is a beautiful thing when someone can be so sure of his faith! How glorious is the evangelical church with its preaching of the free grace of God in Christ, as the hope of the sinner! If we had to rely on our works, dear God, what should become of us! What good we have in us, is it not all a gift from God? But what we have received as a gift, we cannot claim as if it were a merit. And have we done all that we could and ought to have done? Oh, that God would have mercy on us, how many things complain against us! If the word of grace be nothing, then farewell, hope! When I was young, they tried to make me a Catholic in Italy. O Lord, my God, I thank thee that thou hast stood by me there, that I have not gone into the net; for then I should now lie without consolation. Truly Dr. Martin Luther has found out the right gospel, that to faith in Jesus Christ salvation is given by grace. I cling to this grace with both hands.To thee alone, O Lord Jesus Christ,My hope is on earth."
Sunday, June 15, 2025
EC15: Certainty of Salvation (Illinois District 1879)
"…as noted in the opening paragraphs of this essay, it is related to the issue of the election controversy and its implications, even though little reference is made to predestination throughout the essay. … Walther begins by demonstrating the importance of being certain of one’s salvation, proceeds to show how neither personal works nor individual feelings can provide that certainty, and then leads the reader to the true foundation of certainty along with showing how to obtain it.… Walther’s essay provides many examples and suggestions for dealing with a variety of spiritual issues and problems encountered by the pastor as he seeks to lead his people toward a firmer faith".
Thursday, June 12, 2025
EC14: Conversion (Northern District 1873)
“As Walther rightly points out, the subject of a person’s conversion is one of those touchstone articles of faith which will demonstrate the purity and Scripturalness of one’s entire theology, since this locus has points of contact with nearly everything pertaining to a believer’s salvation. Accordingly, Walther treats the subject with the thorough, careful, and reverent study it deserves and which characterizes all his work. The end result is an essay that can serve as a helpful companion to Art. II of the Formula of Concord, which treats the very same topic under the heading “Free Will.” Walther organizes his theses around four crucial questions: (1) What is conversion? (2) What are the means of conversion? (3) How much time is necessary for a person to be converted? and (4) What part does the Christian play in conversion?”
Sunday, June 8, 2025
EC13: Adiaphora, church organization (Central District 1871)
"There are altogether 25 theses in Walther’s book, but his discussion of them ends with Thesis XVIII D. Apparently it would have ended with XVIII C at the Eastern District convention in 1868 at Richmond, Va. [EC12]…if the Central District had not requested elucidation on XVIII D, the point dealing with adiaphora (things neither commanded nor forbidden in Scripture). (It will be noted that this last lecture came much later than the others.) In light of the questions being asked within the church today concerning the wearing of vestments by pastors, the use and value of the historic Lutheran liturgy, the relevance and emotional appeal of Lutheran hymns, and the debate over the role that sociological tools and market research should play in the shaping of Lutheran worship, this lecture on adiaphora is arguably one of the most important in the entire series and deserves extra attention here."