JPK3: Pieper's "Use and Abuse of Analogy of Faith"

     This continues from Part JPK2 (Table of Contents in Part JPK1) in a series defending against the aberrant teachings of deposed Wisconsin Synod Prof. J. P. Koehler († 1951) of the Wisconsin Synod. — We move from Luther now to Pieper. What stirred up the "hornet's nest" by WELS Prof. J. P. Koehler's theology was the controversy regarding the Doctrine of Election between the Synodical Conference and other American Lutheran synods. A major Intersynodical "free conference" was held in September of 1903 in Milwaukee to discuss the issues. What became apparent during the meeting was that the reason for the controversy was a different approach to Holy Scripture. It had to do with something called "the analogy of the faith". After this meeting, Franz Pieper was forced to produce a "signature" essay giving masterful instruction on both the "analogy of the faith" and the Doctrine of Election to try to clear the matter up – if only the opposition would pay attention. The essay was serialized in Lehre und Wehre, volumes 49 (1903) and 50 (1904). The following are

Notable quotes:

Vol. 49 (1903) [EN]

321: "the question arose as to what the analogy of the faith is. … the “analogy of the faith” is not something subjective, …but something objective, namely, the clear statements of Scripture themselves".

322: "And before the doctrine of election could be discussed, a fundamental disagreement had already emerged among the participants in the assembly. … the great gulf that must be bridged if real and true agreement is to be achieved in these matters."

323: "The discussions about analogia fidei were not concluded."

323: "if something does not fit into the framework of the rational context, the theologian would be justified in reinterpreting or completely denying clear statements of Scripture." [i.e. abusing the "Analogy of Faith".]

324: "harmonious unity of Christian doctrine only as a unity in the sense of the divine revelation of Holy Scripture, not in the sense of human reason" [i.e. the proper use and the abuse of the Analogy]

324: "There is a right and a wrong use of the analogy of faith in the interpretation of Scripture."

324: "As church history teaches, the analogy of faith has been invoked to reject clear teachings of Scripture under a good appearance." [Nestorius, Zwingli, Reformed, Oecolampadius]

326: "Zwingli gives Luther the following extra lesson on the interpretation of Scripture [like J. P. Koehler]"

329: "…the analogy of unbelief, which does not want to submit to God's Word, but to be the master God's Word…"

354: "As soon as someone… is forced to distort clear words of Scripture, it is a sign that somewhere, or even in several places, he is not quite right."

Vol. 50 (1904) [EN]

21: "Our confession defines the rule of faith as 'clear Scripture.' Thus it says in the Apology: … should be interpreted or introduced according to the rule, that is, according to the clear Scripture, and not against the rule or Scripture". [(Triglotta p. 441, § 59-60)]

22: "We have a brief rule of faith in the Apostles' Creed. We have a somewhat more detailed rule of faith in Luther's Small Catechism." [Both outline "the faith" that is to be believed.]

24: Luther on Romans 12:6: 

“This is his (the apostle's) opinion: those who have the grace to interpret Scripture should see to it that they interpret it in such a way that it is in harmony with the faith [dem Glauben], and not against it, nor otherwise, than the faith [der Glaube] teaches” [St. L. ed. 12, 334 (not in Am. Ed.)]

27: 'The rightly used analogy of faith is not a guard for the Scriptures, but for the exegetes, who are inclined to insert their own thoughts into obscure passages, and sometimes even into clear passages of Scripture"

      It is to be noted that Pieper's associate, the noted exegete Prof. George Stoeckhardt, did not teach Romans 12:6 as an objective faith, but a subjective one., as reported by Koehler in History, p. 244, and in Stoeckhardt's Commentar über den Brief Pauli an die Römer, p. 560-572 (See Stahlke's hand-written translation here, p. 420-429; Koehlinger p. 170-173.). However Koehler admitted that Stoeckhardt "did not contradict his colleague’s (Pieper's) statement about the analogy of faith." (History, p. 244).

     Now we present a greatly enhanced translation of Pieper's full essay spanning 3 issues of Lehre und Wehre. Many hyperlinks have been added, for navigation and for almost all references:

The full document may be downloaded >> here <<. German text >> here <<.

      Prof. J. P. Koehler's teaching on Romans 12:6, as seen in the last Part JPK2, is in direct opposition to Martin Luther, now Franz Pieper and the Lutheran Confessions, and, as we will see in the next Part JPK4, the premier theologian of Lutheran orthodoxy, John Gerhard.

One may read Prof. Paul E. Kretzmann's remarks on this passage from his Commentary here.