Walther: “Politics in Church Papers”; vs Burkee & LC-MS

      In the 1877 Der Lutheraner, p. 39, Walther commented on the subject of our title, stating the point he made a year later in his 1878 lectures on Communism and Socialism. There are certainly those who would charge Walther with mixing Politics with Religion, and therefore dismiss Walther's counsel as overreacting.  One needs look no further today for socialist support than teachers and leaders of LC-MS schools.  

James  Burkee, a past administrator at LC-MS schools in Wisconsin and New York, in his much publicized book Power, Politics, and the Missouri Synod (p. 161), ridiculed one who 

“touted C. F. W. Walther’s book, Communism and Socialism, and boldly stated that it is the Christian’s duty to oppose communism, defend the right of private property…”

But those parties in the LC-MS, and others who claim to be “Lutheran”, do not originate their charges and ridicule from a Scriptural basis, while Walther does exactly this in his lectures. So we will let Prof. Walther speak for himself on whether he is mixing “Power and Politics” with true Religion, that is the Christian religion (translation by BTL): 

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

      Politics in church papers used to be a peculiarity of America; Germany knew little about it. In more recent times, this has changed. Few religious papers in Germany now keep away from politics, not even the so-called “Sunday papers”! In the Leipziger Allgemeine Kirchenzeitung of January 12, for example, we even read the following: “The barrier of the newspaper stamp, which otherwise closed the area of politics, has fallen; why do we erect a new one for ourselves by saying: Politics does not belong in a Sunday paper?” The writer does not consider that the main barrier, which separates a church paper from politics, is not a newspaper stamp, but the Word of the Lord: “My kingdom is not of this world.” [Jn 18:36]  It is true, however, that it is right for an ecclesiastical paper to raise its voice as soon as politicians publicly act against morality or religion; but this is not politicking; then the church paper remains entirely on the ground assigned to it. Thus, for example, it would not be at all against the character of a church paper if it were to bear serious witness against the atrocities currently taking place in politics in our America; all the more so because even political papers that want to be Christian take a position that glosses over these atrocities and thus dull the moral feeling of their readers through politics. Such papers that want to be Christian then do more harm than the papers of the unbelievers, because the ignorant reader thinks that what such a so-called “Christian” paper approves of must also be right. By the way, the borderline between politics and religion is so easily crossed, and the sectarian papers with their conscienceless and fanatical party politics are such a warning and deterrent example that the Der Lutheraner has so far fearfully avoided even any pretense of dealing with politics, and has therefore so far perhaps done too little rather than too much in this respect. W. [Walther]

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

      Indeed the Old Missouri Synod knowingly refrained from political commentary in its publications, limiting it to only spiritual matters.  A notable example of this is that there is practically no mention of the Civil War during the years of that war. — The Old Missouri Synod never let up on its attacks against Socialism.  In the December 15, 1881 Der Lutheraner, p. 190, the editor reported on international Socialist activity:

“Socialism. At the recent Socialist Congress in Switzerland, a delegate spoke of the slow progress of socialism in America. This is most gratifying. But because of this, the Christian congregations must not put their hands in their laps, but must continue all the more joyfully in their counter-testimony.”

      Today that “slow progress of socialism in America” has completely reversed. One may think that opposition to Walther and the Old Missouri Synod is only prominent today, but Walther and the true Missouri Synod faced scathing ridicule in their day.  And so James Burkee, and those like him, have only joined the long list of those who call themselves “Lutheran”, indeed “LC-MS”, yet oppose, and ridicule, orthodox Biblical, Christian, Lutheran teaching.  Surely Mr. Burkee has to clear his throat if he now identifies himself as “Missouri Synod” or even “Lutheran” in his circles.