WIC2: Pieper's “The Right Worldview” (1923, Synod essay)

      This continues from Part 1 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting a new translation of all of Franz Pieper's essays previously translated in the 1933 CPH book What Is Christianity? And Other Essays. — In this second essay of six, the title assigned by Prof. J. T. Mueller is listed as “The Christian World View”. However the actual German title translated is "The Right Worldview". Pieper addresses a topic that is fresh for today. The Internet delivers countless "worldviews". But Pieper's sets us straight right from the start when we look for "The Right Worldview". The opinions of any person cannot give us this, but God can. As Pieper announces, "It is from God's standpoint that I want to speak to you about the right view of the world." — From Lehre und Wehre, volume 69 (1923), pp. 225-240:

Notable Quotes: 

225: "Copernicanism… a human assumption or conjecture, not a scientifically established fact" [Cp. to statement by theoretical physicist Nieto of Los Alamos National Laboratories here.]

226: "What is decisive for us from the outset (a priori) is how Christ… views Scripture. … So we believe him completely when he testifies to the Scriptures in John 10:35: 'The Scriptures cannot be broken'".

227: "Man did not develop by himself, neither from a primordial cell nor from a lower animal.   Nor did God develop man gradually"

228: "…the end of the world is certain.…we humans forget it all too easily. The end will come quite suddenly"

229: "But where will man go? … Heaven and earth will pass away, but people will remain.… [annihilists] claim that at least the wicked will be destroyed at the end of the world"

229: "the present world exists and is maintained in existence by God for the sole purpose of preaching the Gospel of Christ"

231: "Of course, the majority of people do not agree with this.…They think that… they can develop themselves, what they can achieve in morality, education and culture."

232: "God punishes temporally so that we do not have to perish eternally."

233: "Man also has a beginning, but no end… either in eternal salvation or in eternal damnation."

234: "…let us not forget our concern for the salvation of our own souls.

235: "But each and every one of us should constantly examine ourselves to see what we mean and how our hearts relate to the kingdom of God."

236: "The right view of the world also includes the right view of the family, child rearing and the Christian school." [Cf. this blog post]

237: "…the Gospel is only genuine if no law is added to it, but free grace is taught"

238: "…pure Christian doctrine also includes the rejection of opposing error."

Now I present my new, freely available, English translation which retains Pieper's emphasis of wording:

Download an unhighlighted version here; German text here.

Christians are not to take their worldview from worldlings but from God. And Pieper's essay brings that view into complete focus. — In the next post, Part WIC3a, we begin the essay “The Reconciliation of Man With God”.

WIC1: Pieper's "What Is Christianity?", new translation (1902 Synod essay) (Part 1 of 8)

    Recently I was contacted by a reader who found edification in one of Franz Pieper's great convention essays – "What Is Christianity?".  I have blogged about the 1933 CPH book What Is Christianity? And Other Essays 13 years ago on this blog post, and 8 years ago on this blog post. It was one of the first books that I dug into as I searched for "more treasures" than I knew existed from the old German Missouri Synod. How wonderful it was for me that the great essays were not only translated into English but were assembled into a substantial book. The book may be still be in copyright, but that would only apply to the translation. Although Repristination Press evidently sold a reprint of this book in 1997, they no longer list it in their offerings. So I decided to do with these six essays what I have done with all the other untranslated writings – provide my own free translation so that no one may be hindered by the price of this book after nearly 100 years. The first will be the above mentioned essay. — There are other advantages to my translation in that the original translator, Prof. J. T. Mueller, did not generally carry forward the emphasis of many words in Pieper's original German. These are crucial in getting the full impact of Pieper's meaning. In some places Mueller paraphrased and occasionally added or subtracted from the original.

      While translator Mueller changed Pieper's title, I have translated the original German title that Pieper used, "Das Wesen des Christentums" → "The Essence of Christianity".

Notable Quotes:

24: "The Berlin professor … Harnack's doctrine is briefly this: Christ is not God"

26: "those people who want to come to God through their morality or through their works… the Scripture says Gal. 5:4: 'ye are fallen from grace'"

30: "In short, to be justified by one's own works is the characteristic of blind paganism; to be saved by faith in Christ without one's own works is the characteristic of Christianity."

33-34: Harnack "instructs people that they should only imagine God as Father, bypassing Christ"

36: "a heavenly mindedness…is not instilled in a person… by moral instruction nor by culture and learning"

37: "Faith in Christ comes first, and good works come second."

I refer the reader to my 2012 blog post for other comments to interest the reader enough to take the time to read this 15-page essay. 

      The following translation contains hyperlinks for navigation and references. Now I present my full English translated version of the essay as first published in German in 1902:

For a non-highlighted version, reformatted to 8-1/2" x 11" page, click >> here <<. German text file here; 

 

At the end of this project, I will combine all essays into a single file so that one may have essentially the same material in digital format as CPH's printed book. — In the next Part WIC2…

- - - - - - - - - - - -  Table of Contents  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Part 1: “What Is Christianity?” (or "The Essence of Christianity."; 1902, Synod) (This blog post)

Part 2: “The Christian World View” (or "The Right Worldview"; 1923, Synod)

Part 3a: “The Reconciliation of Man With God” (1916, Southern Illinois District; L. u. W. 1921, p. 289 ff.)

   Part 3b: conclusion of "Notable Quotes", then full translation

Part 4a: “Layman's Movement: Proclamation of the Word (Thesis 1)” (1913, Southern Ill. District)

   Part 4b: Pieper's 8 questions to examine lay Christians

   Part 4c: Women and the "Lay Movement"

   Part 4d: Lay Movement: Proclamation, Financial matters (Theses 1 & 2)

   Part 4e: Lay movement and the Christian walk (Thesis 3); full translation with download

Part 5: “The Holy Bible” (1921, Southern Illinois District)

Part 6: “The Open Heaven” (1929, Synod)

Appendix Part 7: "Christianity as a Hereafter Religion" (1920 Synod, LuW 67 p. 1 ff.)

Part 8: Full book of essays

Walther on Ro. 9:20-23: vessels of wrath and mercy; against Calvinism, go to the Greek words

[2025-10-09: added note in red]

      While researching and translating one of Walther's convention essays, the 1877 Western District (also the 1873 Western District, p. 56, [Convention Essays, p. 40]), I ran across his explanation of Romans 9:21-23 that cleared up my confusion of what these verses actually say.  Calvinists, who hold that God predestined some to damnation, or "Double Predestination", use these verses for their own interpretation of God's election to damnation for some. And indeed the major English translations of these verses are in need of clarification so that one may not be misled. While Calvinists claim to be strictly according to the Bible, we find that not to be the case with these verses. From the essay, p. 92:

C. F. W. Walther, and Lutheran teaching, on Romans 9:20-23:

In our passage we now speak of vessels of wrath and vessels of mercy; of the former it is said in our German Bible that they were prepared for condemnation; of the latter it is said that God had prepared them for glory. In the Greek, however, it is more precisely said of the latter that God prepared them beforehand, not merely prepared them; but this word "beforehand" is not used of the vessels of wrath. This is very important! For from this we see that all who are saved are prepared for salvation by God before the foundation of the world, whereas the vessels of wrath, i.e. those who are damned, are also prepared for damnation, but firstly, not beforehand, and secondly, not by God, but by the devil and their own evil will. Here our doctrine shines forth completely. It would be blasphemy to say that the Holy Spirit has forgotten to add the words "before" and "from God" to the vessels of wrath, so that we have nothing to give to these different ways of speaking! He, who is eternal wisdom, knew perfectly well why he says "from God" one time and not the other, why he says "before" one time and not the other. It is also very important to know that verse 22 in the Greek does not contain the words "therefore there", but instead the words "but if [Εἰ δὲ]". From this we see that when the apostle says in the previous verse, "Does not a potter have power to make one lump into a vessel for honor and another for dishonor?", he does not mean to say: and this is how God really does it, but that he only wants to reject human reason with its foolish objections, which so readily masters and even blasphemes God as soon as it cannot understand why he acts as he does. The apostle rather wants to say: As natural as we find it that a potter makes a soup tureen from clay, and from the same material a nasty vessel, which is placed in a corner so that it is not seen, and how no one confronts him about it: it is just as natural that whatever God may do, no one may confront him about it. This thought, that God does not allow himself to be mastered by us, also precedes the 20th verse, where it expressly says: "Yea, dear man, who are you, then, that you want to be right with God?" No one should therefore be misled by the words "therefore there" into Calvinistic errors, since these words are not in the original text at all, and since the apostle does not say: as a potter makes vessels of honor and dishonor from a lump, so God also first made vessels of mercy and then vessels of wrath; but he continues: "But if God... bore the vessels of wrath with great patience?" So the apostle's meaning is: What will you, what can you say then? [cp. All Glory To God, p. 221] 

I had thought that Walther was the only Lutheran teacher to point out this teaching, but he then referred to the Formula of Concord which taught much the same thing: FC SD XI 79-80. But Walther goes one step further than the Formula by introducing the second point, that the "vessels of mercy" were chosen "beforehand", not "in time". The following chart delineates Walther's points:

Potter (Ro. 9:21):

	Vessels unto dishonour	Vessels unto honour
Prepared by	Potter	Potter

God (Ro. 9:22-23):

	Vessels of wrath	Vessels of mercy
Prepared by:	Devil & themselves	God
When:	In time	“afore”, “beforehand” (προητοίμασεν)
God’s action:	endured	made known the riches of His glory

These verses set God in contrast to the potter. 

    In searching for a literal translation of the Bible, I was pleased to find that the Disciples’ Literal New Testament (DLNT) had perhaps the best translation of the initial words of verse 22: "But what if God…". The word "but" clearly shows that verse 22 is in contrast to verse 21, i.e. God is not like the potter in regards to the "vessels of wrath", He endures them, He does not make them. The DLNT had a wonderful footnote to verse 23: "Note that God endured the one group, but actively prepared-beforehand the other". (I may purchase the DLNT based on this. Hopefully it does not have too much "Reformed leaven".)

      May the readers (like me) be enabled to defend against the false Calvinistic error and be strengthened in their faith in a gracious God who will stay with us if we don't push Him away. (The full text of Walther's essay is upcoming in a future blog series.)

Luther on the Touchstone of Christianity (Part 2)

      This concludes from Part 1 of a short series presenting an English translation of a "set piece" from the writings of Luther, repeated again in the pages of Der Lutheraner in 1846. — This quote was excerpted from Luther's commentary on Psalm 117. When I decided to read this Psalm, I discovered that it had only 2 short verses:

1. O praise the Lord, all ye nations: praise him, all ye people. 

2. For his merciful kindness is great toward us: and the truth of the Lord endureth for ever. Praise ye the Lord.

Such a short Psalm, yet Luther wrote nearly 40 pages of commentary on this! And he concluded it with these crowning paragraphs, what the Der Lutheraner Editor determined to be worthy of repetition. — Again, from Der Lutheraner, vol. 3 (Dec. 29, 1846), p. 50-51: 

The Pure Doctrine of Justification,

a Sure Touchstone for all Sects.

[Conclusion]

Therefore, dear brother, do not be proud, nor too sure and certain that you know Christ well. You will now hear me confess to you what the devil was able to do against Luther, who should have been a doctor in this art; he has preached, judged, spoken, written, sung and read so much about it, and yet must remain a student in it, and at times is neither student nor master. Therefore be advised and do not celebrate too soon. Are you standing? but watch and do not fall [1 Cor. 10:12]. You can do it all? but see to it that you do not lack skill. Fear, be humble and pray that you may grow in this art and be protected from the expert devil, who is called “Smart Aleck” and “Quick Fist,” [Klügel or Kündlin], who can do everything and learns in flight.

If you now want or have to deal with matters concerning the law, or works, or sayings and examples of the Fathers, then take the principal doctrine for yourself above all and do not let yourself be found without it, so that the dear sun, Christ, may shine in your heart, and you can judge freely and safely through and about all laws, examples, sayings and works, and say: Well, if there is anything good and right in them, I know that they are neither good nor right except for this life; for only Christ is good and right for grace and the life to come. And if you do not do this, you can be sure that the laws, sayings, examples and works, with their pretty appearance and the great prestige of the person, will mislead you so that you will not know where you are. I have also seen it in St. Bernard; if the same man also begins to speak of Christ, it is because he is in the heavens; but if he is out of this doctrine, and speaks of precepts or works, it is no longer St. Bernard. And so it is with St. Augustine, Gregory, and all others, that if Christ is not with them, they are vain worldly teachers, like philosophers or jurists.

Therefore Christ is also called in Scripture a cornerstone, on which everything must be built and founded that is to stand before God. But whatever is founded without Him or not on Him must come to nothing and cannot stand. And what else is lacking in the mad saints and factions but that they have left this cornerstone and have fallen back into the works? They cannot get along with it, but must continue, and also make of Baptism and the Sacrament (which are God's Word and commandment) their own human work.

The Anabaptists say that Baptism is nothing if a person is not pious beforehand; they do not want to become pious through and from Baptism, but want to make Baptism holy and good through their piety. This means (I think) that they have completely lost this cornerstone, and not by the grace of Christ, which Baptism gives, but first made holy by themself, that Baptism gives nothing, creates nothing, brings nothing, but we bring and give everything to Baptism beforehand, so that it is nothing but a mere unnecessary sign, whereby one may know such holy people: even so Baptism cannot be such a lasting sign or characteristic whereby one may know someone, but happens once, after which it can no longer be seen by anyone. So do the enthusiasts (or fanatics) with their Sacrament: it need not make pious nor give grace, but show and testify how pious and holy they are without such a Sacrament.

And what has caused such separation, innumerable sects, factions and idolatry among all kinds of foolish saints, priests, monks and nuns in the papacy, except that they have fallen away from Christ and have first become pious through works?

This is why St. Paul so diligently teaches the Ephesians and Colossians that Christ is our head, and that we should diligently hold fast to the head, and thus abide in one another as members of one body, and increase. For the devil neither feasts nor sleeps; he would gladly tear us from this head: he well knows that this piece will break his neck and crush his serpent's head, as Genesis 3:15 promises.

But may God, our dear, eternal Father, who so abundantly enlightens us through his dear Son and our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, also strengthen us with complete faith through his Holy Spirit, and give us strength to follow this light faithfully and diligently, and to praise and glorify Him together with all the Gentiles, both with teaching and life. To Him be thanks and glory for all His unspeakable grace and gifts for ever and ever. Amen.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

The Church Fathers: the good and the bad. 

      I will never forget Luther's comments on "St. Bernard"! I still remember when I was reading Luther's judgment of St. Bernard years ago, how I could still admire this worthy Church Father even with his weaknesses.

      I have had readers disagree with me when I say that the Reformed do not have the pure Doctrine of Justification, but Martin Luther taught against their error explicitly. And Luther explains why the sacraments are important, because of the Doctrine of Justification. — It was the old Missouri Synod Lutherans who brought to our age the true, pure teaching of Martin Luther. I believe it was Walther himself who chose this excerpt as worthy of being repeated in the pages of Der Lutheraner for the edification of its readers. May it be so for today's readers as well, as it has been for me! Amen!

Luther: Justification–Touchstone for all Sects; Der Lutheraner 1846 (Part 1)

      I cannot be certain, but I believe it was Der Lutheraner Editor Walther who chose to quote Luther in one of his more familiar writings that succinctly identifies the heart of Christianity. It also is, as Walther calls it, the Touchstone that exposes all sects where they depart from the true faith. As I read this short quote, I remembered hearing parts of it in my past and I don't know when or how often I heard it, but I will never forget it. From Der Lutheraner, vol. 3 (Dec. 29, 1846), p. 50-51 [EN; AE 14, 36-39; StL 5, 1170-1173, §§ 94-106; WA 31I, 254 ff.]: 

The Pure Doctrine of Justification,

a Sure Touchstone for all Sects.

(See Luther's interpretation of the 117th Psalm from 1530).

 

I give instruction to seek and act on the chief part of our Christian doctrine in the Scriptures everywhere, namely, that we must become pious, alive and saved without any merit, by the grace of God alone, given to us in Christ, and that no other way, path, method, or work can help us to this. For I see and experience all too well every day how carefully the wretched devil pursues this central tenet in order to eradicate it again.

And even if the weary saints consider it a useless thing to do this almost constantly (for they make themselves believe that they know it almost well and have long since learned it); yet I know well how far their conceit is lacking, and know nothing everywhere of how much is at stake in this piece. For where this one teaching remains pure, Christianity also remains pure and harmonious and without all factions; for this doctrine, and nothing else, makes and sustains Christianity. All other points may also shine with false Christians and hypocrites: but where this does not remain, there it is not possible that one may ward off some error or sectarian spirit. I know this for a fact, and have tried so hard that I could not refute the faith of either the Turks or the Jews if I were to act without this teaching.

And even if factions [Rotten] arise or begin, you have no doubt that they have certainly fallen from this principal doctrine [Hauptstück], regardless of the fact that they talk a lot about Christ with their mouths and otherwise preen and adorn themselves. For this doctrine does not allow factions to arise; since it cannot be but that the Holy Spirit must also be there, who does not cause factions to arise, but gives and maintains unity.

And especially if you hear an unreasonable and immature saint boasting that he very well knows that we must be saved by God's grace without our works, and pretending that it is a snap for him, do not doubt that he does not know what he is saying, and perhaps will never know or taste it. For it is not an art that can be learned, or boasted about that one can master it: it is an art that wants to keep us as pupils while it remains as master.

And all who know and understand it well do not boast that they know it all, but feel something of it, as a sweet savor and fragrance, which they seek and run after, marveling and not being able to grasp it, as they would like, thirsting, hungering, and longing for it more and more, and not being tired of hearing nor dealing with it; as St. Paul himself confesses in Phil. 3:12 that he has not yet grasped it; and Christ says in Matt. 5:6, “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness.”

And if anyone has a thirst, let him think of me in this example that I am about to confess. The devil has caught me several times when I did not think of this principal doctrine, and plagued me with passages from the Holy Scriptures so that heaven and earth became narrow for me. Then the works of men and their laws were all right, and there was no error in the whole papacy. In short, no one had ever erred except Luther alone; all my best works, teachings, sermons and books had to be condemned. Also, the shameful Mohammed almost became a prophet to me, and both Turks and Jews became pure saints.

- - - - - - - -  Conclusion in Part 2  - - - - - - - 

      Luther is the object of so much hatred for calling out the Jews and Mohammed, even by LC–MS theologians and writers. But Luther is still correct, and all those who were once ensnared in these groups but were converted to Christianity will agree with Luther.

      Pure Luther. I have had readers disagree with me when I say that the Reformed do not have the pure Doctrine of Justification, but Martin Luther also taught this explicitly above. And Luther explains why the sacraments are important… because of the Doctrine of Justification. — In the concluding Part 2…

John Bunyan, Baptist, goes Back To Luther, mostly

      While researching and translating C. F. W. Walther's 1879 Western District convention essay for a blog series, I ran across his comments on one of Christianity's most notable writers, John Bunyan, and his famous book The Pilgrim's Progress. Walther almost never gives positive remarks on a Reformed writer, so what will he say about John Bunyan's famous work? 

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

The Baptist John Bunyan, the well-known author of Pilgrim’s Progress, an interesting and edifying book, but mixed with Reformed leaven, lay ill for years with the false doctrine of predestination of the Calvinists — for the Baptists were formerly strict Calvinists, and in part still are. When he was in such dire straits that he no longer knew which way was up, an old, torn but still complete book came into his hands, of which he could see that many a tear had already fallen on its pages. It was the English translation of Luther's Epistle to the Galatians. Knowing that Luther had been an extraordinarily famous man, he began to read it, and the deeper he got into it, the brighter he was illuminated by grace, until he was completely freed from all his temptations. He confessed that, after the Bible, this book was without doubt the best that existed in the world, for none was so easy to heal a wounded conscience. A Baptist had to confess this! —  [cp. All Glory To God, p. 246]

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

One may note Walther's caution about "Reformed leaven" in the Baptist Bunyan. Nevertheless Walther call's Bunyan's work an "interesting and edifying book", high praise from Walther for a Baptist writer. (The full text of Walther's essay will be in an upcoming future blog series.)

Bente-Pieper: The great stir in America (Part 3 of 3)

      This concludes a short series (Table of Contents in Part 1) presenting an updated book review of Franz Pieper's Christian Dogmatics, vol. 2 by Friedrich Bente in 1917. — Bente's text is in black font, my comments are indented in red font. From Lehre und Wehre, vol. 63 (1917), pp. 468-469 [EN]: 

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

[Concluded from Part 2]

Missouri has not yet found sufficient reason to abandon its position. And anyone who picks up this volume can see for themselves that there is still no reason to do so today. It leads right into the middle of the battles that Missouri has had to fight for more than seventy-five years. [before 1842!] For it is ultimately his doctrine of grace with which Missouri caused the great stir in America. 

The “GREAT STIR IN AMERICA”... by what?  Franz Pieper’s Christian Dogmatics!  How the opponents hated Pieper’s pure teaching!  They sneered and laughed at him!  (They still do.  Bonhoeffer, in 1931, drove right past Concordia Seminary in St. Louis… [Strange Glory, p. 129])

The Missourian struggle over the doctrine of Church and Ministry is ultimately based on nothing other than the doctrine of justification. 

Those who contend that the differences between the LC-MS and the Wisconsin Synod are chiefly “Church and Ministry” would do well to ponder this statement.  When there is truly a difference, it means that there is a deeper problem with the Doctrine of Justification… something the Wisconsin Synod has denied in the past.

Romanism in the doctrine of Church and Ministry consistently, every time, amounts to a falsification of the Lutheran doctrine of “faith alone”. We are happy to admit it: Walther and Missouri are essentially only the “repristination” of Luther and his doctrine of grace.

The opponents within the LC-MS against its teaching of the past knew this and so they thought to put on a mask of being especially Lutheran by putting out portions of the American Edition of Luther’s Works.  Pelikan and Piepkorn joined with the erring Theodore Tappert to produce his Book of Concord and also to collaborate on the American Edition of Luther's Works.  The situation is the same today as the LC-MS’s Robert Kolb joined with the ELCA’s Timothy Wengert for their unionistic Book of Concord.  Yes indeed, they call themselves “confessional”, Luther scholars!  But it is all a mask, for it was C. F. W. Walther who spearheaded the true Confessionalism and the greatest Back To Luther movement since the Reformation Century!

And no attentive Lutheran will put down this volume of Pieper's Dogmatics without the impression that Missouri's battle for Lutheran truth was a great, glorious, holy, victorious war! 

Truly a Battle Royal!  Lehre und Wehre, or “Doctrine and Defense”, is filled with faith-strengthening essays and reports on this battle.

And the clarity, certainty, firmness and determination with which Dr. Pieper moves in the presentation of the doctrine of Scripture as well as in the refutation of the antitheses, creates the confidence that here speaks a master in Israel, a proven leader, whom no one can follow in his discussions without at the same time arriving at his own certainty. 

… “Here speaks a Master in Israel [Franz Pieper]”!

– Friedrich Bente – a true Church Historian!

Over the decades, many of the strange prejudices against Walther and his theology have fallen away. And anyone who wants to lose the last remnants of his mistrust of Missouri and convince himself that in Walther and the theologians and congregations that have gathered around him, that Luther's Lutheranism has indeed experienced an American resurrection, should read this second volume of Dr. Pieper's Dogmatics. F. B. [Friedrich Bente]

“Luther’s Lutheranism – An American resurrection.”  –  Bente states it beautifully!  He pronounces Pieper’s Dogmatics to be not only the heart of Walther’s teaching and that of the Missouri Synod, but also the heart of Martin Luther's teaching.  Even more, Bente implies that Luther’s teaching had been largely covered up for some time and had experienced a resurrection.  Where?  In America.

- - - - - - - - - -  End of book review  - - - - - - - - - - 

In the above, Bente prophetically stated the following 

"Missouri has not yet found sufficient reason to abandon its position."

It struck me that he stated it this way, "not yet", acknowledging that this could happen going forward from 1917. And indeed there was even some rumblings in the early years of the 20th century by some pastors anxious to make peace with the other, more liberal, synods in America, particularly in the Eastern and English Districts. I believe Pieper saw what was brewing in the last years of his life and defended vigorously against the false doctrines in the opposing parties. But alas, the Synod spiraled downward after Pieper and Bente went to their eternal rest, and especially after Theodore Engelder passed in 1949. May today's LC–MS turn back, back to Luther and the old Missouri Synod! Amen!