Preuss8: great shame for Missourians… or honor? Ziegler overlooks facts

      This continues from Part 7 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting C. F. W. Walther's account of Dr. Eduard Preuss's apostasy to the Roman Catholic Church. — Walther now concludes his account of this sad, confusing matter, and turns Preuss's defection into an honor for the Missourians. 

      Walther gives an account of another Missouri teacher who left Lutheranism for Catholicism, H. M. Baumstark. Some information on him was provided by Arthur Drevlow in his 1972 dissertation A History Of Concordia Theological Seminary Of Springfield, Illinois, p. 52-53:

“In 1865 H. Baumstark was called to teach in the pro-seminary. However, he remained with the faculty for only a short period of service which ended in a bizarre way with his joining the Roman Catholic church in 1869.”

Walther fills in the full story on Baumstark below. — From Der Lutheraner, vol. 28 (Feb. 15), pp. 75. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - -    An Apostasy.    - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[by C. F. W. Walther; Part 8]

We can see in this nothing but a deep horrible apostasy from God and His truth against better knowledge and conscience. See 2 Thess. 2:8-12. 

But isn't it a great shame for us Missourians that one of those under us leaves us again and becomes a papist? 9) We answer: Nothing less than this: rather it does us great honor; for from this everyone can see that hypocrites and swindlers can also get lost into our fellowship, as a Judas himself had gotten among the apostles, but that such spirits cannot dwell among us. With such spirits none of the lower ones leaves us, but strangers who for the sake of earthly advantage had lost their way among us. As John writes of his time: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us”. 1 John 2:19. We in no way envy the Jesuits such men as Preuss, for he is made for them. As we have seen, what had long since been agreed inwardly, is now also agreed outwardly. — 

————————

9) The Papists glory in that this is already the second “professor of theology” we have lost to them. That is a vain glory. [H.M.] Baumstark was not a professor of theology, but only had to teach in the pre-seminary of the practical institution good-reading, spelling, the beginning of geography and Latin grammar etc.; but because he had to have a name for which one could call him, he was called “professor” according to the custom of the country. Of course, we Lutherans are pleased that Mr. Baumstark is so highly impressed by our dignity distribution that even after a fall he keeps his honor together.

————————

You ask dear reader whether we regret having accepted and trusted the unfortunate Preuss for as long as we could? We answer: No, we don't regret it. That is the way of Christians, that they can easily let their love be deceived, but never their faith. It is true, distrustful, suspicious minds usually are right in experience because people are so evil; but the distrustful are therefore not right because love, as long as it can, believes the best of its neighbor. We have <column 3> therefore only one wish: that God, whose door of grace always remains open in this life, may take pity on the fallen and, if not sooner, but in the hour of death, withdraw him from the idol which he now worships and calls Mary, and draw him back to himself and still save him as a branding iron from a fire, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our mediator, to whom be praise and honor in time and eternity. Amen. W. [Walther]

- - - - - - - - - -  End of essay  - - - - - - - - - - -

     Prof. Roland Ziegler stated in his essay (p. 291) that “The only source for Preuss's reasons for defecting to Rome is the account he published seven years later.” It may be noted that he does not follow the advice of Prof. Ludwig Fuerbringer, but rather ignores Walther's report of the facts in the above article that exposes Preuss's real reasons. He assumes that Walther's account is suspect because it would be biased, so Ziegler prefers the reporting of history by the method of so-called "wie es eigentlich gewesen ist" ("as it actually was").  Perhaps Prof. Ziegler wanted testimony from more of the people involved, such as the editor of the Abendschule newspaper, or other members of the faculty.  But Walther had no interest in defending his own person, or dragging other people into his report. He knew they would support his report if called upon.

      I have spent much time translating and polishing this essay because of its church history and especially because it rightly distinguishes between truth and error, between truth and lies. It took me some time to decide whether to publish it because it can be somewhat difficult to understand in places, such was the convoluted world of Dr. Preuss. — May Prof. Ziegler's final words be heeded (p. 308):

The tragic apostasy of Preuss is a warning to all of us: "Therefore, let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall" (1 Cor 10:12).

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

      There is a postscript to this story: Walther's answer to Dr. Preuss's response, and to attacks from opposing Lutherans… in the next Part 9a