M26: L. to M.: “do away with some points”; Walther's Kern und Stern (another BTL book)

[2023-07-19: added note in red below]

       This continues from Part 25 (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.” — Melanchthon had appeased Luther with his apology.  Did his private letters show the change from his former habit of deriding Luther privately in correspondence with others? — Then a head-turning report by Ratzenberger of a near death request by Luther to Melanchthon. — This portion from LuW, 22, pp. 369-371 [EN]:

 - - - - - - -  “Luther's ‘Carrying’ of Melanchthon?” by C. F. W. Walther — Part 26 of 28  - - - - - - -

Even with Amsdorf, whom he previously considered Luther's stimulus, Melanchthon now seems to have been reconciled. At least he writes the following in the same year [1545] mentioned on July 24, among other assurances of his love and veneration for him: 

“Although I very much desired to accompany Dr. Luther on his journey to you, for there is nothing (LuW 370) I like to see more than when we talk together most sincerely about the most important things, I nevertheless prefer not to leave here without your permission.” (p. 798) 

When Luther traveled to Mansfeld in October of the same year [1545] for his rest and in December to settle a dispute, he forced Melanchthon to accompany him. (p. 864, 910) On November 11, Melanchthon reports to Medler: 

“Dr. Martin read yesterday the story (written by you) at the evening meal, to which he had invited our pastor (Bugenhagen), Cruciger, G. Major and myself; how he is in the habit of inviting his friends to his house on that day. Because Luther was born on the day before Martini and is now entering his 62nd year (?).” (p. 887) 

On January 20, 1546, he reports once again that he had been invited by Luther to supper and had therefore declined another invitation.” (C. R. VI, 17) On February 8, he dubbed Luther “his most dear father and restorer of the pure doctrine of the gospel.” (p. 33) When the ailing Melanchthon was to be sent back to Regensburg in January 1546 for the Colloquium, Luther was displeased and wrote about this to the Elector under January 9: 

“What would you do if Master Philip were dead or sick, when he is truly sick, that I am glad that I brought him home from Mansfeld. … He likes to drink, if one wants it, and risks his life; but who will advise or bid him so in such danger, in which one wants to try God, and in the end stifles us ourselves with a vain repentance. The young Doctors must also go up and speak after us.” (de Wette. V, 775 [StL 21, 3178]) 

Brück, who had talked to Luther about this, reported the same to the Elector: 

“The Doctor never wanted to advise that Philip should be sacrificed to the journey and vain needless toil. … Thus would Philip be a faithful man who neither shuns nor avoids anyone, but he would be weak and sick; it would have cost him no small effort to bring him back home alive, for he would not have wanted to eat or drink” etc. (C. R. VI, 10) 

Still from Eisleben, therefore, Luther writes to Melanchthon in the warmest and most friendly manner. He begins his third-last letter, dated February 1, 1546, with the words: "Grace and peace in the Lord! I also thank you, my Philip, that you pray for me, and I ask you to pray for me.” (de Wette. V, 782 [StL 21, 3190-3191]) In his penultimate letter of February 6, he greets him as “the faithful servant of God, his most precious brother” (p. 785 [StL 21, 3192]) and in the last letter of February 14, as his “most worthy brother in Christ.” (p. 974 [sic: p. 791; StL 21, 3202]) 

Most strange, by the way, is a note by Ratzenberger, to which Seckendorf (L. III, f. 693) also refers: 

“One wants to speak for a constant truth and to assert that, because Dr. Luther noted his weakness and worried that he would have trouble with his life, he had before his end, to a good friend called Master Johannes Rothe who had been around him at Eisleben and (LuW 371) later became pastor at St. Nicholas, ordered that, as soon as he [Rothe] would come to Wittenberg after his [Luther’s] death, (he) [Rothe] would seriously admonish Philip that, due to the most recent conversation which he, Luther, had held with him, he wanted to do away with some points in his Locis communibus, which Luther had fought against and had referred to Philip, and leave them out.” (Ratzenberger's Handwritten History of Luther, etc., edited by Neudecker. Jena, 1850. p. 139.). 

- - - - - - - - -   Continued in Part 27  - - - - - - - - - -

Walther calls Ratzenberger's note "most strange", signifying that he is aware that this may be the only report of this extraordinary request by Luther.  He is also aware that Luther's request fits the situation of "some points" of Melanchthon's questionable theology, and that it corroborates Walther's thesis. — In the next Part 27…

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

Walther's Kern und Stern

The Formula of Concord, Core and Star

 

      In 1877, the Old Missouri Synod published a small book from the pen of C. F. W. Walther: Der Concordienformel Kern und Stern. This book was quoted 17 times in Prof. F. Bente's Historical Introductions, signifying the esteem this book had within the Old Missouri Synod.  That was the main reason for me to spend many weeks getting it translated, polished, and extensively hyperlinked.  Why would I do this since it has already been translated in 2012 by Rev. Kenneth Howes and published by Lutheran News, Inc.?  I did not do it because this work of Rev. Howe was inadequate.  How happy I was when I purchased Howe's translation 10 years ago, and delighted in Walther's history and defense of true Lutheranism.  But it seemed now that this book is so important that it should be made freely available to all and made easy to search, navigate and research on one's own. My translation, a modified DeepL translation, may be viewed below

or it may be downloaded as a DOCX file HERE, or a PDF file HERE.

What advantages will this new electronic publication offer the reader over the previous translation? It

• includes the emphasis of words made in the original German text
• includes missed sections by Howe — these are highlighted in light blue (they are not extensive)
• added a Table of Contents, with hyperlinks
• has a translated extensive Index, with all entries hyperlinked to their respective place in the body.

Now this book cannot only be read by all, it can be linked to by page or even text phrases. It has also, in Part II, an excellent summary of the individual articles in the Formula and the subbject of their defense.  A good way to study this book, after first reading Part I, is to browse the Index and find topics of interest. (This book is so good, the reader should consider purchasing a copy of Rev. Howe's translation for only $7.95.) [2023-07-19: See also my 3-part series presenting Pieper's companion book on the Augsburg Confession here.]

      A second reason I undertook this project was to offer a better alternative to the syncretistic, Phillipist history of Dr. Robert Kolb, who in a 2001 essay, ostensibly to honor Walther, was critical of his history! See Part 24, Kolb's essay here. We see clearly that by this time, in 2001, Kolb's intent was to replace Bente and Walther with his own history.