Excursus: Walther reviews Gräbner's book on Luther; no "nasty stains that spoil"

[2023-09-12: added note below on WELS pastor's English translation.]

      This is an "excursus" to follow a Der Lutheraner essay on the life of Prof. A. L. Gräbner (Part 3c).  Here we present an English translation of C. F. W. Walther's book review of Graebner's book on Luther's life Lebensbild des Reformators den Glaubensgenossen in Amerika or Portrait of the Reformer's Life to Fellow Believers in America. Walther's comments are instructive for us today as he distinguishes what makes a good biography of Luther vs. what does not. The year was 1883, the Jubilee year of the 400th anniversary of the birth of Dr. Martin Luther. Many books were published on the Reformer for this occasion, but Walther's short article explains to us the distinction in the quality of these books.  — Graebner's book is a perfect complement to Pastor Hermann Fick's wonderful book of Luther from  1869. From Der Lutheraner, vol. 39 (1883), p. 120:

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

Dr. Martin Luther. Portrait of the Reformer's Life to Fellow Believers in America Drawn by A. L. Gräbner. Milwaukee, Wisc. Published by Geo. Brumder. 1883.

Legion is the name of the Luther jubilee writings that have already appeared this year. Among them, the descriptions of Luther's life undoubtedly take the first place. The really good ones of these Luther biographies are, however, unfortunately, only a very small number. Apart from those in which a thoroughly false picture of Luther is sketched, many of the better ones also contain nasty stains that spoil the beautiful picture sketched. This is not the case with the picture of Luther which our dear friend and brother Gräbner, professor of theology at the seminary of the Wisconsin Synod in Milwaukee, has "drawn for the fellow believers in America. Among the few good ones, the same is indisputably the best, not only from this year, but also from this century. It is true that, as he himself openly admits at the beginning of his work, he has consulted and used in his work what has been written before him about Luther's life, namely the relevant work of the United [Prussian Union] professor Dr. [Julius] Köstlin, which is mostly based on thorough source studies; however, as not only Prof. Gräbner testifies, but as the comparison irrefutably shows, this has always been done “with the preservation of an independent judgment”. In short, whoever wishes to have a new, more detailed Luther biography, which presents the true Luther correctly in all aspects, we can only recommend Gräbner's biography urgently. The research of many only now discovered documents has spread a light over many things concerning Luther, over which a certain darkness was hovering until now. Therefore, the work of Gräbner is not dispensable by any older writing of this kind. May therefore the stupendous faithful diligence with which it has been worked out find its richly deserved reward at least in the fact that many hands reach for it and many hearts are strengthened by it in the faith in the truth which God, through His chosen armament, drew Luther out of God's Word into the light again four and a half hundred years ago. May especially all Lutherans within our orthodox Synodal Conference, from whose midst the work has sprung by God's grace, recognize and faithfully use the gift that He has given them above all. The publisher has delivered more than he promised. He had promised the completion of the work only for the month of October; but to our great joy, it is already available in its entirety, and, worthy of the excellent content, excellently equipped, both in terms of type, paper and binding. Forty-eight beautiful illustrations adorn the text. With a volume of 543 pages, the price of $2.50 is a very modest one. May the Lord Himself make way for the book to find entrance into many Lutheran homes and to bestow the richest blessings for time and eternity. W. [Walther]

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

Walther's statement that even the better Luther biographies "contain nasty stains that spoil the beautiful picture" strikes against many of the volumes of the CPH American Edition of Luther's Works, even the so-called "New Series".  More will be said about this later.  Also Walther mentions the name of the Dr. Julius Koestlin, the well known German historian of Luther, and reveals that he was a professor of the unionistic "Prussian Union". Walther clearly places Graebner's historical judgment over Koestlin's.  Today LC-MS scholars routinely place erring German theologians over the Old Missouri's historians.  Perhaps the LC-MS might want to take the words "Missouri Synod" out of their name? 

       Fortunately I do not have to translate this book into English since Pastor Waldemar D. Loescher has already done this 8 years ago in 2014, and the Wisconsin Synod offers a free download on their "Essays" download website. [2023-09-12: Available in Kindle format here.: By God's Grace The Life of Dr. Martin Luther 1483-1546] — In the next Part 4a of the Der Lutheraner series, we publish a review of another excellent book, this time one by Franz Pieper.

Hist22a: LC-MS critical of Hochstetter's History: Forster, Mundinger, Rosin

[2025-08-31 updated link to Wuerffel book]

      This continues from Part 21 (Table of Contents in Part 3), a series presenting an English translation of Pastor Christian Hochstetter's 1885 496-page book entitled (abbreviated) The History of the Missouri Synod, 1838-1884. — This final installment to the series has the unpleasant task of exposing the many criticisms made by LC-MS theologians and leaders against Hochstetter's History.

Walter O. Forster: Zion on the Mississippi 

    Rather than list all the many criticisms and innuendos by Forster against Hochstetter (and others), I will repeat a comment by Stella Wuerffel († 1994, Find-A-Grave), author of the 1980 book Two Rivers to Freedom [2025-08-31 updated link] (see here), concerning Forster's reliability as a historian of church matters.  Wuerffel, in her book which is descriptive of the 1838-39 Saxon Lutheran Emigration and contains a surprisingly laudatory "Foreword" by CHI Director August Suelflow, states her "Preface", p. iii [2025-08-31 added link] (my emphasis):

"Walter Förster's opinionated interpretation of these events and people"

"Opinionated"? – I had to laugh out loud when I read this comment by the dear Ms. Wuerffel, for she is the only writer I have found who publicly pronounced the proper judgment of Forster's work.  Needless to say, Ms. Wuerffel would hardly judge Hochstetter the same as Forster. — Dr. August Suelflow stated of author Wuerffel that "she undoubtedly knows the events described more intimately than any other living person."

Carl S. Mundinger: Government in the Missouri Synod, p. 17-18:

The traditional way of describing the spiritual side of life in Saxony during the early decades of the nineteenth century is to call it the Age of Rationalism. Usually such adjectives as “dark,” “bleak,” “sterile,” and “oppressive” are added to make the picture supposedly complete. Writers, particularly those in the Missouri Synod, assume that rationalism was exclusively dominant [a misleading, or false, statement, otherwise what was the Prussian Union about if rationalism wasn't dominant?; exceptions were pointed out: Rudelbach, Harless, Guericke, Brunn, Zorn, Scheibel, even Loehe, and others are specifically pointed out as welcome exceptions], that it was growing in power during this decade and that it was making life progressively impossible for those who wished to maintain a Bible-centered faith. (Hochstetter, Die Geschichte der Evangelisch-Lutherischen Missouri Synode… ) … p. 18: Aside from the fact that it is frequently misleading and quite often inaccurate and unhistorical to call a certain number of years that have been deftly dated at both ends an “age” of something, rationalism in Saxony during the fourth decade of the nineteenth century was lacking in vigor. It was definitely on the decline [Ms. Wuerffel's book is another testimony against Mundinger's false judgment].

Mundinger may be less caustic than Forster in his criticism's, but he is essentially in the same camp. We see this in his Springfielder essay “Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm Walther Churchman” where he states of Schieferdecker’s exclamation over the Altenburg Theses, p. 28-29: “Whether it was really the 'Easter Day' of the bedeviled colony, as one of the participants, the exuberant Schieferdecker, later called it, may be questioned.” Leave it to an LCMS historian, Mundinger, to kill the "exuberance" over Walther's great work! Mundinger echos the comments of the opponents of the Old Missouri. Sad for the LC-MS. Mundinger's history also "may be questioned".

Wilbert Rosin, in his "Preface" to Dr. Fred Kramer's 1987 English translation of Walther's The Congregation’s Right To Choose Its Pastor said (p. VI) :

     Parenthetically we might note that a half century later Christian Hochstetter in his history of the Missouri Synod speaks of differences between Stephan and Walther even before they came to America, differences which allegedly [Rosin follows Forster's  "opinionated" questioning attitude] caused Stephan to suspect Walther and even assign a roommate to spy on Walther. No proof is supplied. [Hochstetter's "imagination"?] Walther approved this writing. [Walther would not approve slander against Stephan. Neither did Stella Wuerffel.] Walther offers no hint of this. [Walther cared primarily about the doctrinal issue, "doctrine vs. life".] That Walther was chosen to go from Saint Louis to Perry County to confront Stephan in 1839 may have stirred Hochstetter's imagination and influenced his memory and interpretation five decades later. [Where is Rosin's objectivity now?? Rosin has already passed judgment by airing this conjecture. The "opinionated" spirit of the LC-MS and Forster…]

     Consider that Hochstetter wrote just two decades after Leopold von Ranke attempted to write his history of the papacy wie es eigentlich gewesen [how it actually was] and historians were just beginning to stress the importance of objectivity in historical writing. [Rosin values so-called "objectivity" over spiritual understanding, over doctrine? See Pieper on "Historical Theology"]

It should be noted that Prof. Rosin also stated in his Preface to this 1987 translation: 

"We were overjoyed when Dr. Kramer volunteered to translate Walther's Das Gemeindewahlrecht just when we were finding it impossible to carry out the project in time for a graduate course. Dr. Kramer worked swiftly but carefully, thereby making our task much easier." 

This was 3 years after Kramer had finished his translation of Hochstetter's History in 1984.  Could it be that Dr. Kramer was strengthened greatly by Hochstetter so that he "volunteered" to translate Walther's writing, having learned of the truthfulness and very real orthodoxy of Old Missouri?  (Where are the volunteers to translate Walther today?)

       In the next Part 22b, more criticisms of Hochstetter by other LC-MS theologians.

History 3: What others say; Walther commends; ToC-Table of Contents (Part 3 of 20+); a BTL Book

[2023-03-31: I discovered another refreshing endorsement of Hochstetter in Prof. Kurt Marquart who stated, among other things, in Logia 1997 vol. 6, no. 2, p. 35: 

"It is a pity that Hochstetter’s gem of a history has not been translated into English. Hochstetter had been Grabau’s assistant in Buffalo, and had started out with strongly clericalist, anti-Missouri convictions. If his well-informed account especially of the Missouri-Buffalo fracas were generally known, romantic illusions about Grabau as champion of strict Lutheranism would lose all their charms. Grabau tried, tyrannically and unsuccess- fully, to transplant a state-church system without the state-church."

Compare this with Pastor Todd Peperkorn's judgment of the same here.]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  -

      This continues from Part 2, a series publishing an English translation of Pastor Christian Hochstetter's 1885 480-page book entitled (abbreviated)

The History of the Missouri Synod, 1838-1884.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Historians favorable to Hochstetter's History

Ludwig Fuerbringer's 1936 CTM essay "Walther as Churchman" referenced Pastors Hochstetter and Köstering's histories (see this blog) as faithful narratives for Missourians to rely on – he offered no critical comments against these. — In the category of more recent LC-MS favorable theologians, along with Dr. Fred Kramer, is Dr. Cameron MacKenzie, who, while not expressly mentioning Hochstetter's work, refuted a claim of antagonist Walter O. Forster (Zion on the Mississippi, p. 523-25) concerning an account of Dr. Marbach, and so vindicates Hochstetter's History (Pieper Lectures, Vol. 10 (2006), "Call and Ordination in the Thought and Practice of C. F. W. Walther…", p. 36, n. 23). — A respected LC-MS historian, Lewis W. Spitz Sr. (1895-1996; CTSFW), in his "Preface" to his 1961 The Life of Dr. C.F.W. Walther, calls out, among others, Hochstetter's History as a trusted primary source.

      Another recent LCMS theologian referencing Hochstetter is CHI Director August Suelflow († 1999).  His book C. F. W. Walther, Servant of the Word, p. 144-145 states (emphasis mine):

“An important contribution in this area was made by Christian Hochstetter (1828-1905) [Find-A-Grave], who wrote a comprehensive history of the Missouri Synod. It was published in 1885, two years before Walther’s death. The book continues to be the most reliable source available from that time. Hochstetter had been a pastor in the Buffalo Synod, but joined the Missouri Synod in 1867 when his theological convictions shifted. Walther received a copy of the volume from Hochstetter and read it immediately, though with great trepidation because he was so personally involved with the Synod’s history. In a letter to the author of the book, dated July 31, 1885, Walther expressed his great satisfaction with the history:

"great service which
you have rendered…
you allowed the
facts to speak"

      ‘Now after I have completed reading with great interest and joy your history of our synod, and its doctrinal controversies, I am compelled to express my deepest and most sincere appreciation to you for the great service which you have rendered by it not only to our synod, but above all to the cause of truth. At first, I grant you, I dreaded to read your splendid book, because I myself occur in it so often. I was afraid of my own evil heart, which is so greatly prone to ascribe a little also to myself for what God has done to me out of incomprehensible mercy and for [how] he has used me as his most unworthy instrument. Finally, however, after God allowed me again and again to feel my incompetence for all good and my damnableness, I overcame my dread. ... [Y]ou allowed the facts to speak, facts which simply cannot be gain-sayed. ... When I was reading your book it struck me more vividly than ever before, that next to God’s incomprehensible mercy in making us poor sinners a memorial of His free grace, the true cause of our success is the conviction (given us by God) under all circumstances to remain with His truth and the heritage of the Reformation and not to sacrifice one iota of it, even if (because of that) everything erected would be brought to ruin again. That this conviction was also mine and remained mine to this hour, I cannot deny for the sake of God’s honor, who gave it to me. Cursed be every thought that seeks to claim for itself what belongs to God, but far be it, too, out of false modesty to deny what God has done in us.’ (Letter from Walther to Hochstetter, July 31, 1885; transcription by W. K. Wadewitz at Concordia Historical Institute.)”

So pronounces C. F. W. Walther on Hochstetter's History of the Missouri Synod. All who question Walther's spiritual judgment, the "gain-sayers", are in essence fighting against Holy Scripture, the Lutheran Confessions, and Luther's Reformation.
- - - - - - - - - - - -

Historians unfavorable to Hochstetter's History

Forster's Zion on the Mississippi, old & new covers.
Generally viewed as conservative,
yet lacks spiritual understanding.

      There are several LC-MS historians and theologians who have criticized Hochstetter's History – none more severely than Walter O. Forster in his 1953 CPH book Zion on the Mississippi, a standard history in LCMS circles.  Forster repeatedly questions the testimony of several historians from the Old Missouri Synod, including Hochstetter and Walther. More importantly, he also questions their motives. He calls Walther "equivocal" (p. 303-304).  Forster gives the distinct impression that he, as the objective historian, questions Walther's honesty.  He uses phrases such as "fatuous assertions" (p. 303).  We saw above that Dr. MacKenzie refuted at least one of the spiritual judgments of Forster (on Dr. Marbach). An earlier blog post pointed out Forster's opposition to Walther's judgment of mediating theologians in Germany.
      At their worst, these unfavorable LCMS historians and theologians promote the thought that older historians such as Hochstetter could be accused of idolizing Walther, just as Pastor Martin Stephan had been. But we see that Hochstetter perfectly answers this accusation, which most Old Missouri historians faced, in an 1882 essay, p. 79 (translated):

"It must be noted that Walther does not make the spirits subject to himself but to the Word of God; but he knows how to teach it so emphatically and clearly that the truth must prove its irresistible power, that doubt must give way, while that which seemed difficult to some becomes easy and the uncertain finally becomes certain!". 

This accusation is far from the truth, for the convictions of these Old Missouri historians were made Rock solid (1 Cor. 10:4) by the Word of God, i.e. the Holy Scriptures. — The false judgments by LCMS historians is similar to a case related by August Suelflow in his book.  He reported (Servant, p. 116) on a story that the Confederate flag flew over Concordia Seminary during the Civil War period.  Suelflow continued:

"This false story has been printed as fact elsewhere, even as recently in such prominent works as Werner Elert’s Morphologie des Luthertums, [The Structure of Lutheranism, CPH 2000] Yet in his 1870 rebuttal, Walther once and for all stated:…"
 (bolding mine)

August Suelflow accepted Walther's personal testimony as the truth against a German scholar in this case.  I will follow Suelflow's testimony for the credibility of Walther, against that of LCMS historians like Walter O. Forster.  (Unfortunately Suelflow did not fully trust Walther's testimony against LCMS historians such as Forster.)

      But so as not to spoil the beauty of Hochstetter's History, I will try to refrain from too many polemics against the LC-MS's attempts to cloud, question and ignore it. Readers should just read Hochstetter's History for themselves and not just take other scholars opinions on it. Then they may judge for themselves whether this History, and others like it, deserve to be heard. (Dr Fred Kramer did, and rejoiced.) They may do this even without access to the primary sources at Concordia Historical Institute because this is Church History, and all Christians are called to judge for themselves in spiritual matters because they have God's Word – "The Sheep Judge Their Shepherds". — In the next Part 4, I begin with my publication of an English translation of... Pastor Christian Hochstetter's  †  History of the Missouri Synod  †.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  Table of Contents (tentative)  - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Part 1 – Lehre und Wehre (Schaller or Stoeckhardt) book review

Part 2 – Prof. Fred Kramer's "Preface" to his translation into English from the German original

Part 3 – Walther's recommendation; favorable & unfavorable historians; Table of Contents

Part 4a – Hochstetter's "Foreword": he came from outside on issue of Church and Ministry; Word of God rules
Part 4b – "Foreword", part 2 of 2; Hochstetter to Missouri on Predestination; God blessed… Missouri Synod

Part 5 – Chapter 1: Luther leaves Germany for America; Prussian Union→Emigration to America

Part 6 – Chapter 2: Stephan unmasked; Walther's Church & Ministry saves Emigration; Rast misjudges
Part 7 – Chapter 3: Ministry defended, Democratism overcome – spiritual priesthood, not ungodly lay rule

   Excursus: 1850, Walther's address on Romanizing: "zeal leads them beyond Lutheranism"
Part 8 – Chpt. 4: Wyneken–“thunder following lightning!”
Part 9 – Chpt 5: Older Synods, Methodists; better church histories of A.L. Graebner, F. Bente
Part 10 – Chp 6: Missouri’s 1st 2 years; Der Luth.; education, missions; “This is what the Lord has done!”
Part 11 – Chp 7: Loehe & Grabau: "beyond Lutheranism", fall on doctrines of the Church and the Ministry
   Excursus: LCMS & Harrison vs. Walther on "Church and Ministry"
Part 12 – Chp 8: Walther-Wyneken to Germany; reproved, response
Part 13 – Chp 9: Buffalo Colloquy; Luther's "sh*t ban"; ordination not a divine command
Part 14 – Chp 10: Loehe to Romanizing, millennialism, Antichrist error: Iowa Colloquy
Part 15 – Chp 11: Usury; 25th Anniv.;Synodical Conference; Ohio Synod falls on Election of Grace

   Excursus: Walther's "sharp polemics" against Stellhorn: on Election of Grace
Part 16 – Chp 12: Election of Grace Controversy, on Predestination; against Calvinism
   Excursus: 2 judgments of Walther: Prof. Mayes faults Walther, again (Gerhard's terminology)
Part 17 – Chp 13a: Germany supplies, fights; Election Controversy concluded: “they laugh at us…, in danger"
   Excursus: Germany–then & now: Friedrich Brunn & Martin Blechschmidt
Part 18 – Chp 13b: St. Louis: USA’s new Wittenberg; Walther's Sem. bldg addresses, greatest on USA soil

Part 19 – Chp 13c: Schwan's address; Hochstetter reviews (conclusion of book)
Part 20 – Hochstetter's obituary in Der Lutheraner (1905);  “mouth of Walther”
Part 21 – Full texts of the book, downloadable, in German and English
Part 22a – LC-MS critical of Hochstetter's History: Forster, Mundinger, Rosin

Part 22b – LC-MS criticism: Suelflow, Schmelder, Peperkorn, etc.

Jerusalem's Destruction… in Old Missouri's hymnbook? (Reformation or Halloween?) Part 1 of 2

Destruction of Jerusalem
70 A.D.

      Although there is a Wikipedia article on the history of the Destruction of Jerusalem which gives much information, yet it does not affirm that it is indeed the fulfillment of Christ’s prophecy, Luke 19:41-47, Luke 21:20-24. What the world largely does not know, including most people within the LC-MS and the other former members of the Synodical Conference, is that this history was not only printed in many of the popular hymnals, but it was also read in the worship services on the 10th Sunday after Trinity. This day in the Church Year most recently was August 25, 2019, next year – Aug. 19, 2020.

      I would not be surprised if Walther himself had this "Destruction of Jerusalem" included in his Hymnal.  He may have obtained it from old orthodox hymnals from Germany, but this is speculation on my part.  It was printed in the final pages in many editions.  Perhaps LCMS Senior Assistant to the President Dr. Jon Vieker could answer this question.
      As far as I can determine, this history has not been included in any of the English translated hymnbooks after the transition from German to English.  Neither was it included in the most recent translation of Walther’s Hymnal (CPH 2012) by Matthew Carver.
      There is much talk and commemoration of the misfortunes of the Jews in more recent times. Although these misfortunes were not foretold by Christ, the Destruction of Jerusalem was foretold in Holy Scripture – it is an historical event agreed upon by virtually all modern historians. And this history was not only not avoided by Old (German) Missouri, it was given a full reading in a regular worship service once every year… but never by the (New English) Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod. 

      For additional details on non-spiritual matters of this history, see Wikipedia Siege of Jerusalem and the First Jewish-Roman War. There are a few maps on these Wikipedia sites, and there are several more helpful maps available at this site, although their accuracy in detail is unknown.

      This blog post is providing the full digitized German text from the original German hymnbooks for German speaking readers:



     Not only was this Description ("Beschreibung") in the hymnbook, an essay explaining and giving additional details on its history was published in Der Lutheraner, vol. 43 (August 1887) by Prof. Gottlieb Schaller. just a few months before he passed away in November.  For German speaking readers, the original digitized text is provided below:

      In the concluding Part 2, more information will be provided along with separate English translations of these two publications.  It will then present a side-by-side synchronized presentation that gives the fullest picture of how the Old (German) Missouri Synod took their instruction for repentance seriously. —  It will be presented on Reformation Day, a day that is more commonly "celebrated" as Halloween – a day "celebrated" for its images of terror and horror.  Can you believe that a story of a mother eating her child was read in church?... in the next Part 2.

History of Religions… or folly? Historian… or fool? Friedrich Michael Schiele and modern "church history"

      This blog's mission, in part, is to present proper Church History, something that is sorely lacking in today's modern world.  But during the lifetime of Franz Pieper, his writings gave his readers a purely Christian perspective on events and people from around the world — amazingly so.  In the following short comment by Pieper from 1913, we gain a true perspective on most writings of "church history" in our modern world:

Lehre und Wehre, vol. 59 (1913), p. 570. Translation by BackToLuther, modified from DeepL translation (Google). 

The folly of a historian of religions. A bookseller's advertisement quotes the following pronunciation of the historian of religions [Friedrich Michael] Schiele, who died in the summer of this year [1913]: “The historian of religions has to tell the people without any ulterior motive what the results of his professional work led him to and how he arrived at the results. His messages may shake the faith in the truth of religion—he must not cover it up or weaken it. They may confirm the faith—he must not make any attempt at persuasion. With serious openness and without any tendency, he gives us news of what has allowed him and his fellow researchers to find by methodical research. Sincerity knows no bounds at all.” This could, at best, be applied to pagan religions.  But no one can play the role of a knowledgeable and a critical person towards the Christian religion. If he does, he is an exceptional fool. The natural man does not hear anything of the Spirit of God; it is foolishness to him and cannot recognize it, for it must be spiritually directed. All knowledge of the Christian religion and all understanding of it is only imparted through faith in Christ's Word. The one who does not recognize this and acts accordingly is an ignorant man and inflated in his heart without reason, as the Apostle Paul explains 1 Tim. 6:3-5.      F. P. [Franz Pieper]

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

Schiele's assertions are similar to those who promote "objectivity" or "scientific method" or "impartiality" in religious history over a Scriptural perspective.  This methodology was also used in judging Holy Scripture itself by other German scholars.  One of them was quoted in the 1886 Synodical Conference Report (Boomhower translation, p. 22: Thomasius ): “If only one gives himself up to them impartially, he will immediately convince himself that these scriptures are not dictated by the Holy Spirit.”  The Report responded:

“May God preserve in grace every pious Christian from such ‘impartiality’”!

There are many posts in my blog labeled "Church History" and "Historical Theology", but this post included a quote from Pieper that sets the bar for understanding true Church History:

"Where things are as they should be, the Church will, therefore, elect only such men as professors of church history as are thoroughly conversant with the Scripture doctrine in all its parts, well informed in dogmatics, in order that the instruction in church history will not confuse but aid Christian understanding." (Franz Pieper, Christian Dogmatics I, 100-101, also here)

So we know by Prof. Schiele's own words that his "history" is not true Church History, but at best can be consulted only for pagan religion history.  —  Church Historians in the LC-MS, such as Drs. Paul L. Maier (example) and Cameron MacKenzie, although not without some benefit, at times overrule a Scriptural perspective, essentially following Schiele's methodology, in the interest of unionism or in order to gain the favor of today's scholars.

Seckendorf As Church Historian, Spitz thesis (Pt 2)

(modified on 11/10/2014)
In my recent post regarding Veit Ludwig von Seckendorf, I lamented that his major work of the History of Lutheranism has not yet been translated into English.  However further research has yielded some benefit from the work of the LC-MS historian Dr. Lewis W. Spitz.  He wrote some articles for the journal Concordia Theological Monthly, but prior to these he wrote as part of his dissertation at the University of Chicago a treatise on Seckendorf as Church Historian.  Because of its value and also its obscurity for public viewing, I want to publish the OCR'd text of this work:
     L.W. Spitz, "A Critical Evaluation of Veit Ludvig von Seckendorf as a Church Historian" ==>> PDF copy

What follows is the text of an extract from this dissertation:

The lay reader without knowledge of Latin or German will find reading this article difficult.  But it is worth the effort to just go to page 154 and read the highlighted section on "justification", especially where Seckendorf says:

Luther, however, excluded charity from the act of justification.

That statement is the Reformer and Reformation in a nutshell!  I would also invite the reader to do a search on the word "Luther " (with a space after) and read information relating directly to Martin Luther.  This may perhaps stimulate further reading.  I admit that part of my motive for posting this essay on Seckendorf is to perhaps promote interest with some Lutheran scholar in the world who will see Seckendorf's work as having value for Christians today... and translate it into English!  After all, Franz Pieper said this of Luther's polemical writings:

It's all entertaining!

What Christian does not need true entertainment?  —  Spitz wrote other articles on Seckendorf:
1) for the Journal of Religion, 1945 (see here for download copy)
2) for Concordia Theological Monthly in 1945 and 1949 (see here for downloads, alternate here)

Why is Seckendorf so important as a Church Historian?  Because Pastor Hermann Fick noted (here, page 164) how Seckendorf praised Martin Luther's response to the Diet of Regensburg especially for holding firm on

The Lutheran Doctrine of Justification.  

Correspondence of Walther – Roy Suelflow "disturbed"

Roy Suelflow

[2020-02-23: updated link to scanned book; April 28, 2015 – added download link to original book scan, see below.]

Continuing the theme of "Church History" from the last post, the letters of C.F.W. Walther speak with a pure judgment of the history and defenses of Lutheran theology.  I am hereby re-publishing a book of translated letters of Walther which was not published by Concordia Publishing.  It was self-published by Roy Suelflow in 1980 († 1981).  I want to reproduce the first paragraph of his preface:

“Recently I worked through the letters of C.F.W. Walther (1811-87) as a participant in a major production of Walther essays and papers to be published by Concordia Publishing House.  It disturbed me that many valuable and interesting letters had to be excluded from the projected volume of letters because of space limitations.  It is hoped that this small volume here offered to the public will rescue a few of these letters from continuing obscurity.”

I must agree with the dear Roy Suelflow!... it disturbs me as well.  The "major production" he spoke of produced the 1981 CPH book Selected Letters in the series Selected Writings of C.F.W. Walther (see original dust jacket to the left).  CPH  is now offering this book in the "Print On Demand" format.  And I suspect Concordia Historical Institute has published more translated letters.  But I want to make Roy Suelflow's self-published book available to everyone... as I believe he would want it that way.  What follows is the OCR'd text of his book.  There have been other books that published English translations of Walther's letters here and here.  But for now, the reader will find in the following letters (and Suelflow's helpful Notes) a Christian heart as Walther pours it out, just like the letters of Martin Luther. (Highlighting is mine.)



2020-02-23 April 28, 2015: Download PDF scan  >>>  here  <<<. (1.9 MB, text searchable)

What are some of the subjects of interest?  One area of theology Walther deals with is Pietism and pietistic tendencies (see letter of January 19, 1846 beginning on page 20).  It is surprising to read Walther's caution against those who would attempt to defend against it without a true knowledge of theology.  I learned much (still learning!) on the subject of Pietism and the persons involved.  Very good Church History here...

Another point of interest is Walther's letter of May 23, 1878 to Th. Ruhland in Germany (see page 79).  It is revealed that Walther's preference for his successor was George Stoeckhardt.  Walther's choice was blocked, and he says

"...the election was conducted and a younger man elected who had studied at our Concordia, and although he came from the Wisconsin Synod, had become a darling of the Missourians. His name is Franz Pieper."

Walther complained... but God had other plans for his dear "Missourians" for He sent them the "Second Walther" against Walther's wishes... God sent the 20th Century Luther to the Missouri Synod.

Seckendorf & Spitz– 2 church historians; Why no English translation? (Part 1)

[2020-08-04: corrections noted below in red: wrong "Lewis Spitz"]
Many, many books have been written on "Church History", but not many are very good at telling the true story of Church History.  I have quoted Franz Pieper previously on how one is to judge those who should write of Church History (or Historical Theology, and it bears repeating:

It is the function of historical theology not only to give a historically true picture of the events, but also to evaluate these established facts in the light of Scripture.  Historical theology is the divinely taught art of ascertaining from Scripture God's verdict on the historical events and conditions.  That is what makes church history a theological discipline.  When the church historian judges events according to his subjective view or any other extra-Biblical norm, church history is no longer a theological discipline. ...Where things are as they should be, the Church will, therefore, elect only such men as professors of church history as are thoroughly conversant with the Scripture doctrine in all its parts, well informed in dogmatics, in order that the instruction in church history will not confuse but aid Christian understanding.

Veit Ludwig von Seckendorf
from de.wikipedia.org

So when I come across sources of true Church History, the ones that build my Christian faith, I take note of it.  In the last blog post, Pieper mentioned a quote that Lutheran historian Veit Ludwig von Seckendorf († 1692) recorded in his monumental Commentarius historicus et apologeticus de Lutheranismo published in Latin.  But how could I get more true Lutheran history from this Seckendorf since he is apparently unavailable in English?  Maybe someone has translated his highly regarded work of Lutheran Church History into English?  So I researched this with the powerful tool of the Internet – WorldCat, Google Books, HathiTrust, Bayerishe Staats Bibliothek, etc., and current scholarship on Seckendorf such as by Solveig Strauch.  What I found was that there is no English translation of Seckendorf's work, but there are many who have probably borrowed from it. Lewis Spitz, in 1949 (CTM vol. 20, pgs 446-450) [2020-08-04: fixed broken link], pleaded for the public to be aware of Seckendorf's work because it was becoming rare, probably from 2 World Wars, and it had never been translated into English.  I have wondered that since Lewis Spitz 

• seemed to regard Seckendorf highly and
• is so highly regarded as a Reformation scholar, 

...then why didn't he translate Seckendorf into English?  Sigh... another wonderful Christian writer who remains untranslated... like Antonius Margaritha.  I suppose us English speaking Lutherans will have to just content ourselves with the quotes used by others of Seckendorf, for example:

• Franz Pieper's quote in my last blog post on Elector John Frederick
• Hermann Fick in his book Life and Deeds of Dr. Martin Luther (search "Seckendorf" here)
• Friedrich Bente's three references to Seckendorf in his Historical Introduction to the Symbolical Books 

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

[2020-08-04: the below identity is likely the wrong "Lewis Spitz" as there were 2 men with this same name associated with the LC-MS.  The writer of the Seckendorf article was Prof. Lewis W. Spitz Sr. (1895-1996) – see this Find-A-Grave notice. There seems to have been no close relationship of these 2 "Lewis Spitz".]
So along the way of researching Seckendorf, I ran into a fellow researcher, a scholar, albeit from decades ago.  And he was associated with the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.  He was Dr. Lewis William Spitz (Jr.? 1922–1999).

Dr. Lewis William Spitz
LC-MS historian

So I decided to also (once again) read some of the writings of Dr.  Spitz, a highly regarded scholar and historian – of church history and other history.  I have read much from him in the past, and I take note of the following:

• Lewis Spitz almost never gives credit to either Walther or Pieper for any of his proper judgments of Luther or Church History.  In this respect, Spitz reflects the influence of modern theology in that he can give copious quotes from Kant or Machiavelli or Goethe or Coleridge, etc.  And yet,
• Lewis Spitz is refreshing in that he did not totally disregard the basics of Lutheran theology: sola Scriptura, sola fide, sola gratia... he does not totally falsify Martin Luther – witness his article "Luther's Sola Scriptura" from CTM vol. 31 (1960) pgs 740-744 [2020-08-04: fixed broken link].

In comparing the Church History taught by today's Prof. Cameron MacKenzie of Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne, and that of Dr. Lewis W. Spitz, there is a great difference.  And so I say that after one first becomes grounded in the true Christian doctrine from Pieper, Walther, and Luther, then some of the works of Prof. Dr. Lewis William Spitz can have some benefit.

For myself, I prefer to concentrate on the pure Church History as presented by Luther, Walther and Pieper (and Friedrich Bente).  I have set aside Lewis William Spitz because I want the pure historical theology of Luther and it is somewhat watered down by Dr. Spitz.  But it is not watered down by Walther or Pieper.

And would to God there were some true Christian scholar today who would distinguish himself and translate the entire work into English the works of Veit Ludwig von Seckendorf. so that we may read more of the history of Lutheranism and of individuals like John Frederick, the Magnanimous.

To further true Church History, I want to re-publish an obscure book of Walther's letters in my next blog post.

World War I 100 years ago today: Why? (Read Pieper)

Today, July 28, 2014, marks the 100-year anniversary of World War I.

Why do I bring this topic to this blog?  Because there were many German-American Lutherans in this land at that time.  The early fathers of the Missouri Synod came from Germany, many to escape persecution of Lutheranism in their fatherland.  And as I have perused the writings of those who lived through the "Great War" from the old (German) Missouri Synod, they presented a refreshing basis of true history that either refutes the worst of modern history, or filled in the true reasons for the anger that built into the so-called "Great War".  Why?... why are they the best source of true history?  Because all other historians ignore or are ignorant of the true motives involved as they ignored matters of the true faith, Christianity.

There has been a resurgence of books written recently purporting to give a more complete or incisive analysis of why this war started.  I have examined several for reference, but only to compare them to what I have learned from the German-American Lutherans of the old (German) Missouri Synod.  Virtually all of the history books take no notice of the religious aspects or underlying motives.

The old (German) Missouri Synod could see right through the motives of all sides.  But if you really want to learn of why the war began and progressed to its horrible stature, you will study especially...Franz Pieper.  It was especially Franz Pieper who struck at the heart of all matters involved, for he not only read the papers from around the world and kept himself informed on all events, but he also believed God at His Word.
Again, the best of these was none other than...

Franz Pieper, the Twentieth Century Luther!

Oh, how I have wished that he lived to record the true history of... World War II.

Concordia Triglotta in 1921 (Graebner vs. Pieper) Part 2

In the last post, I advertised the "re-introduction" of the old Concordia Triglotta book by Concordia Publishing (CPH). (See Table of Contents here)   However, since that time, I was reminded again of a short essay that President Franz Pieper wrote to introduce the original publication.  And to publicize the "re-introduction", I want translate what Pieper said back in its beginning.  An extra motive I have to do this is to counteract any additions that CPH (e.g. Paul McCain, Charles Schaum, Benjamin T. Mayes, Edward Engelbrecht, John T. Pless, David Scaer, Matthew Harrison, etc.) want to add to this marvelous book.

There were actually 2 introductory articles published in 1921:

1. "Concordia Triglotta" in the periodical Theological Monthly, October, 1921 issue, pages 289 - 297, by Prof. Theodore Graebner.
2. "Concordia Triglotta" in the periodical Lehre und Wehre, October, 1921 issue, pages 297 - 301, by Prof. Franz Pieper.

Since the article in Theological Monthly is already in English, the English speaking reader can immediately understand it.  But there is a difference between the spiritual understanding of the 2 authors.  Prof. Theodore Graebner said himself that already in 1921 and earlier he was beginning to harbor false doctrines surrounding the continued separation of the Missouri Synod with other American Lutheran synods – Ohio, Iowa, Norwegian synods – later to be the ALC, then the ELCA.  And so these words of Graebner in 1921 announcing this glorious book should sound so ominous now (page 289):

...we hold it to be, that the Lutheran Church is even now entering upon a new era of growth and development, greater than any of the past. Who, then, standing at the threshold of a new day for Lutheranism, shall say what this book, containing the history of its great trials and the memorials of its triumphs, the platform upon which it invites the Church Visible to unite for future labor and conquest, — what this Concordia Triglotta means to the Church of the coming years?

I say "ominous" because of what this same professor announced 18 years later in December 1939 (8 years after Pieper's death) – a statement that revealed not only a profound misunderstanding of the differences with the opposing American Lutheran synods (Ohio, Iowa, and Norwegian - later ALC and ELCA), but of the Doctrine of Justification itself and so also the Lutheran Book of Concord.  And so what Graebner attempted to herald in 1921, "a new day for Lutheranism", turned out to be a day of horror in December 1939...  the day of the birth of a lukewarm Lutheran church.

Before Pieper's essay appeared in October, 1921, he had in the month before (September L.u.W.) given a brief announcement in the "Literature" section, on page 276.  Translated it reads:

Literature.

Concordia Triglotta. The symbolical books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, German-Latin-English, as a memorial of the four hundred year jubilee of the Reformation, anno Domini 1917, published by decision of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio and other states.  Price: $ 10.00.

Just before the end of this issue, a copy of this monumental work comes to us, which presents in three languages ​​(Latin, German and English) the Lutheran confessional writings to the Church.  We have earlier expressed ourselves publicly that very special thanks of the Synod are due the editors, professors Bente and Dau, if they would by God's grace complete their work which required difficult and great theological ability.  We repeat it here.  Of course later in "Lehre und Wehre" we will bring a more detailed discussion of this superb work.      F. P.

As I read this brief announcement by Pieper, I wondered that the original idea for this project came from Prof. Pieper himself.

In the next Part 3, further information is given concerning the unionistic English language editions published since 1921.  Then later, I will present my translation of Pieper's "more detailed discussion of this superb work" – the Concordia Triglotta.