M02: The Melanchthon Conundrum; “Slight doubts [from] Church Fathers.”; list of LC-MS opponents (2 of 28)

      This continues from Part 1 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting an English translation of C. F. W. Walther's 1876 essay “The ‘Carrying’ of Melanchthon on the Part of Luther.” — Walther opens with a statement of the complexities in trying to assess the theology and behavior of Philip Melanchthon during the last 10 years of Luther's life. Then he shows the first false step that Melanchthon made…

      A real treat is that we get Walther's translation of the Latin and Greek writings and correspondence so common at that time. And it is now rewarding to have the letters of Luther available to read in English in the newly translated St. Louis Edition. Too bad that much of the other writings surrounding the Reformation remain only in Latin and Greek (also German), unavailable to English readers. At least Walther gives us a window into these writings that were formerly only available to scholars. We pickup the text at page LuW 322:

 - - - - - - - -  “Luther's ‘Carrying’ of Melanchthon?” by C. F. W. Walther — Part 2 of 28  - - - - - - - -

First of all, far from stating that Melanchthon during Luther's lifetime either consciously deviated from Luther's doctrines in any article, or, if this was the case, that he should have walked out freely with his delusions and opposed Luther, he rather thought either that only his form of teaching was different and that he only softened certain, as he thought, ambiguous, paradoxical, harsh expressions, or if he himself was already clearly aware of his departure from Luther's doctrine and had secretly spoken out against those of his own convictions, he sought to conceal his deviations at all times by expressing himself ambiguously and, in addition, publicly confessing Luther's doctrines in all respects, so that the unsuspecting Luther had less idea than others of Melanchthon's doctrinal deviations. *)  

——————

*) We will deal later with those cases in which Luther noticed that Melanchthon really deviated, also confronted him for this reason, but Melanchthon gave way or gave reassuring explanations. 

This is the alternative [i.e. conundrum] that first confronts anyone who has taken a more than superficial view of Melanchthon's behavior in the last ten years before Luther's death.  [1535-1546]

Slight doubts about Luther's doctrines of Holy Communion seem to have been raised in Melanchthon's heart as early as 1535, not during his study of the Scriptures, but during the reading of the Church Fathers, especially the Greek ones.**) 

——————

**) [Valentin] Löscher, who also reports this, says in this connection: “What led him to this, among other things, is that he had an almost divine respect for the writings of the fathers.” (Hist. mot. II 31)

On the 12th day of the year 1535 he wrote to [Johannes] Brenz: “I see that there are many testimonies of the ancient writers (Church Fathers) who unambiguously interpret the Sacrament in a typical and tropical [figurative] way; but the sacred testimonies of the saints are either of later origin or spurious.” Not only did he write these words of his in Greek in an otherwise Latin letter (no doubt out of concern that the letter might fall into indiscrete hands), but he also adds: “I ask you to interpret this letter to the best of your ability and, when you have read it, to tear it up immediately and show it to no man.”  (Corpus Reformatorum. II, 824) Nevertheless, Melanchthon, at least because he had not yet overcome his (LuW 323) doubts, still publicly and solemnly confessed himself to Luther's teaching in this respect. In 1536, as is well known, he too signed with Luther the so-called Wittenberg Concord, which he himself had received an order to draw up between the Wittenbergers and the south German theologians (see Luther's Werke. Hall. Ausg. XVII, 2529 ff.; [StL 17, 2087 ff.]).  Among other things, he writes to his trusted friend [Joachim] Camerarius that he “could not, as he wished, prevent the meeting” (Corp. Ref. III, 89), and confesses to his Veit Dietrich: “Since I have tried in vain to prevent the meeting, I have finally taken the step of advising that we (at least) should not enter into a final settlement.” (p. 97) 

- - - - - - - - - -  Continued in Part 3  - - - - - - - - - -

From relying on the Church Fathers to grudgingly signing the 1536 Wittenberg Concord, Melanchthon begins the change from his earlier orthodox theology. 

      Melanchthon had a habit, in his Latin correspondence, of writing certain phrases in Greek to conceal his thoughts from “indiscrete hands.”  Walther uncovers these phrases so that we can judge them for what they are. My parents spoke German among themselves to conceal their conversations from us children. We will see another example of this later in Part 24 where Melanchthon cloaks a criticism of Luther in Greek wording (Luther “thunders and flashes against certain other things.”). — In the next Part 3… — 

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

      As C. F. W. Walther, in Part 1, named his opponent Director Hardeland of the Leipzig Mission Society, so I will also name the opponents in today's LC-MS. There is a widespread effort to discredit the historical work of Prof. Friedrich Bente, which also falls against the above work of C. F. W. Walther.  Who are these people waging this attack?  They are, past and present,  

Dr. Lowell Green, († 2014) against Bente's history of Melanchthon in an essay of 1977 (chapter 7) on a matter of the Lord's Supper and in a 1980 book on Melanchthon's later doctrinal weakening,  

the leaders of the 1517 Legacy Project now under the website 1517.org, in their May 19, 2017 "The Thinking Fellows" (TTF) podcast promoting the legacy of Melanchthon and criticizing Bente's history (05:35—26:05),  

 Drs. Scott Keith, Adam Francisco, Rod Rosenbladt, and host Caleb Keith, 

Pastors Christopher Gillespie and Donovan Riley, in their Dec. 5, 2018 "Banned Books" podcast also criticizing Bente's history in general and of Melanchthon in particular, and

Prof. Dr. John T. Pless (CTS-FW), who would, indirectly as a promoter of Dr. Green's teaching, also teach as he did.

. 

Also indirectly, by reference, the opposition to Bente's history is also being waged by Drs. Robert Kolb (LC-MS, Charles Arand (LC-MS), James Nestingen (ELCA [2023-06-02: NALC]), when they claimed in their 2012 Fortress Press (ELCA) book (p. 281-2) that their history has “much greater precision than was possible a century ago” (which includes, if not targets, Bente's Historical Introductions). In all of the histories that Dr. Kolb has written about the Book of Concord or the Formula of Concord, few even mention Bente, and none use his history. While Dr. Green and his followers explicitly criticize Bente, Dr. Kolb simply ignores Bente's history, except for a critical remark in a 2018 essay (p. 205). Simply put, Dr. Kolb has always intended to replace Bente's history, and all the Old Missouri histories, in the LC-MS. (We have not even highlighted Dr. Nestingen's denial of the vicarious satisfaction.) — Also Dr. Erik Herrmann and Dr. Paul L. Maier (LC-MS) (by extension) may be included in this listing. — 

      More details of the charges made against Bente's Historical Introductions will be forthcoming. However there was a surprising defense of Bente made within the LC-MS in 2005.  Who would stand up to such an array of LC-MS opponents?  Find out in Part 9.