Memories 6: Pieper’s essays; 1st Brief Statement; Fürbringer called to faculty

      This continues from Part 5 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a series by Prof. Ludwig Fürbringer of his personal memories of the departed Franz Pieper in the 1931 Der Lutheraner magazine. — These "memories" of Fürbringer were wide-ranging.  To his credit, he recognized, to a certain extent, the greatness of Franz Pieper.  And his highlighting of Pieper's major essays delivered before Synod conventions gives us readers a true picture of that greatness.

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

(page 266, col. 2)

Memories of Dr. Franz Pieper.

by Ludwig Fürbringer – [2.] (Part 6 of 16)

For three years I was allowed to study under Pieper and the other unforgettable members of the faculty: Walther, Günther, Schaller, Lange, and Stöckhardt, who at the time was not a full professor, but a so-called Professor extraordinarius and pastor of Holy Cross congregation. And I can safely say that I often looked up the notes that I made in the lectures of these men in later life and still occasionally use them today. The deepest stimulus emanated from these men on my whole theological, religious and personal life. And the same will be witnessed by the 3,394 candidates for preaching who made their examinations here in St Louis during the fifty-three years of Pieper’s activity, and who entered the service of our Church with only a few exceptions. Also then in the years 1885 to 1893, I have seen and heard Dr. Pieper nearly every year. So during the Synod of the year 1887 in Fort Wayne, Dr. Walther went to his blessed eternal home. Stöckhardt had stayed in St Louis to be close to Walther in his last days, while Pieper attended the Synod.

In 1888, he then delivered one of his many, (page 267, col. 1) beautiful synod essays at the Synodical Conference meeting in Milwaukee on the “Unity in Faith”, and I had the opportunity to hear it. At that time I was particularly interested to hear, in addition to Pieper, also for the first time Dr. A. Hönecke of the Wisconsin Synod, the keynote speaker with Pieper at the meeting, and the friendly discussions that both often had; but also Bente emerged at that time. In the years 1887 and 1889 I visited St Louis and at least I was allowed to visit my revered teachers briefly. In 1890, Pieper again came to the fore at the Delegate Synod in Milwaukee and, as at the 1884 meeting, presented one of his short, excellent papers, as well as in 1893 at the St Louis assembly. In 1884, the subject matter [“Scripture Doctrine”], suggested by the relations of the time, was the question of when only is a doctrine a doctrine of Scripture, namely, only if it is based on the express written Word, and what results therefrom. In 1890 he dealt with the theme: "The Gospel or the Pure Doctrine of Justification, the Source of Proper Enthusiasm and the Right Guide to All Work in the Kingdom of God";

In 1893 he gave an “Overview of Our Position in Doctrine and Practice, Which We Take as a Synod on the Surrounding Error and Abuse” [LCR translation], perhaps the most common and best-known of his papers, which I have in a handy separate print since then, and handed over or sent innumerable times to those who did not know our synod and sought information from me. But it was quite natural that, as a young pastor, I only greeted him and my other teachers on such occasions, and did not rob them of their time as they were busy and men in much demand. But from those years I have an opinion from Pieper's hand, in which he gave good, proven advice on behalf of the faculty for my then congregation and myself in a difficult marriage case. of Faculty”

There came, I would like to say like a flash of lightning from heaven, when I was already on my way to New York for a trip to Germany, the news of my election as a member of the St Louis Faculty, after Lange in October 1892 and Günther in May 1893 had blessedly gone home. When I think back now, I must still wonder as much as I did then that the choice fell on me.  And more than once I wondered what my former teachers, who in 1887 had appointed A. L. Graebner as the professor in the place of Schaller's professorship, had come to think of my choice in their heart. Nevertheless they all were so friendly, when I asked them in Chicago at the conference of professors of that year for their open expressions of opinion, to encourage me to accept the call. And so in August 1893 I joined the faculty as the youngest member, where after a few months already my longtime friend, and colleague Bente followed. From then on I have been able to teach and work at Dr. Pieper’s side for almost 38 years. And what I have learned from him in these many years dear and good, what I have learned from him to his death, remains one of the most pleasant memories of my life, about which I would like to write further next time. L[udwig] F[ührbringer].

- - - - - - - - - - - -  continued in Part 7  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

      Fürbringer reports that the relationship between Franz Pieper and the Wisconsin Synod's leader Adolf Hönecke was quite good – "the friendly discussions that both often had".  This is in stark contrast to the report of Wisconsin's historian J.P. Koehler.  It was claimed by Koehler that Hönecke told him privately in 1878 the following about the “Missourians” (History of the Wisconsin Synod, p. 153):

“There is something sectarian about them.” (the Missourians)

It would appear that either Hönecke was being duplicitous with Pieper or Koehler was intentionally creating discord between the two synods with his "history".  I am convinced by Fürbringer's account that relations were indeed quite good between the Missourians and Wisconsin, especially before Koehler gained ascendancy after the death of John Schaller in 1920.

      Fürbringer characterizes the earliest "Brief Statement" of 1893 as the "most common and best-known of his papers". I am providing an English translation by the LCR of this essay in 1971 here.  It is worthy of reading today to see a true Lutheran teacher lay down truly Christian assertions in defense of the faith.  This essay actually predates his 1897 writing that is considered by some, e.g. Dr. Lawrence Rast, as the first "Brief Statement".

      The "longtime friend, and colleague [Friedrich] Bente" is mentioned in this narrative. As I reviewed Old Missouri's history years ago, I wished that it had been Bente who wrote these memories of Pieper, as he was stronger than Fürbringer in upholding the pure Gospel and the divinity of Holy Scripture against erring American Lutherans. Bente is reported by his wife to have said this of Pieper's Dogmatik (Biography, p. 108):

“It was written by the right man, at the right time, in the right way. It leaves for the reviewer nothing but reiteration, emphasis, and enthusiastic acclaim.”

But since Bente passed away a few months before Pieper, we must settle on these memoirs of Fürbringer. It is indicative of today's LC-MS that Bente is given virtually no credit for his work on the Concordia Triglotta in the lastest Kolb-Wengert Book of Concord. Bente's masterful Historical Introductions, although sold by CPH, is almost universally faulted by its theologians. The newest Kolb-Wengert book, admitted to be a unionistic work, has "richer historical context" (sigh). — In the next Part 7…