Pieper's “The Reformation & the 3 Counter-Reformations” (Eastern District, 1930) (Part 1 of 4)

* * * * * *   June 3, 2024 – 93 years after Franz Pieper went home.  * * * * * *

————————————————————

      A review of the old Convention Essays that I have published (here) caused me to review again the last one of these by Dr. Franz Pieper in 1930 at the Eastern District convention. This was delivered only a few years after his massive effort in publishing his 3-volume Christliche Dogmatik, which had finished in 1924. The essay gave a short review of Luther's Reformation, and followed it with a review of those who opposed it from various camps. Perhaps this material may be known to readers in various degrees, but the coverage of the "counter-reformations" was most beneficial for me, to show the clear distinction from the Church of the Reformation. 

      Pieper's essay was entitled, in English, "The Reformation of the Church and the Three Counter-Reformations". One will find the listing for this convention essay on my "Convention Essays" blog here. which provides my earlier downloads of the German text and the scanned copy from the Eastern District report. This scanned copy has now been uploaded to the Internet Archive here. —  In this 4-part blog series we cover each major heading separately. The first of these is the Reformation itself:

I. The Reformation.

Notable Quotations:

p. 15: "We have in Scripture from the mouth of our Savior a description of the life (a “biography”) of the world… Matthew 24:14".

15: "God does not hate the lost world of sinners, but loves them, as the Scriptures expressly testify… John 3:16".

16: "They must repent, that is, recognize themselves from the law as sinners worthy of condemnation, and seek refuge from the curse of the divine law in the one who took the curse of the law upon himself and thereby put it away."

17: “To this (Jesus) all the prophets [of the O.T.] testify, that through his name all who believe in him should receive forgiveness of sins”, Acts 10:43.

17: "The great multitude did not want to repent of their sins and therefore also refused to accept the Gospel of grace of the forgiveness of sins for the sake of Christ.".

18: "…under the papacy. The anguished consciences, anxious for the forgiveness of sins, were not directed to the Gospel, but were sent on journeys to Rome, to Compostella in Spain and other places of pilgrimage, also directed to monasteries and nunneries as especially blessed places…"

18: "At Constance, the man who knew something of the Gospel (John Hus) was condemned to death and burned.".

18: "Neither the councils nor the popes have supreme authority in the Church. In the Church there is no rule of men at all.".

18: "the bull “Unam sanctum” (from 1302)…was unanimously accepted and sanctioned that the Pope had supreme power in both the Church and the State."

19: "The Reformation of the Church consists in the fact that God, through Luther's ministry, gave the Gospel of grace back to the Church in apostolic purity."

19: Walther: "After all, Luther was equipped by God to be a Reformer only because he was first in that hell of anguish over his sins…"

20: "We do not forget that through the Fathers of our Synod the pure doctrine of grace of the Church of the Reformation has also come to us."

20: Luther: "Oh, it is a living, busy, active, powerful thing about faith that it is impossible that it should not work good without ceasing."

21: "“problem of social attitudes”. It is said that the Church, if it wants to gain more influence in the world, must also take the physical needs of people to heart. Faith in the gospel of grace also solves this “problem”." [I.e. no "social gospel", only Gospel]

21: "Truly, the Gospel of grace is not an enemy of sanctification and good works, but the working power, as of the forgiveness of sins and salvation, so also of sanctification and good works."

      In Part 4, a download of the full DOCX file will be provided, which will then be added to the original Convention Essays listing. — In the next Part 2, we extract the major points Pieper uses to demonstrate "The Roman Counter-Reformation."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -  Table of Contents  - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Part 1: This blog post: Introduction; "The Reformation"

Part 2: The Roman Counter-Reformation

Part 3: The Reformed Counter-Reformation; inner testimony of the Holy Spirit (TSSI)

Part 4: The Counter-Reformation within the Lutheran Church: Melanchthon's error

Corvinus, Lutheran martyr; differing histories (Part 1 of ?)

      This coming Sunday will be the 5th Sunday in Lent, also known as Judica.  As I was researching published books by Old Missouri, I ran into a reprint of sermonettes by Antonius Corvinus which contained one for this Sunday.  The 1899 reprint was edited by the excellent Prof. A. L. Gräbner who gave the proper history of this defender of Reformation doctrine. This book had been highly approved of by Martin Luther in his Preface to it. — But before we present this sermonette, what follows is a survey of the contrasting histories of Corvinus that show, once again, how so-called "objective" histories of modern theologians miss the mark.

      What do current histories say about Corvinus?  The LCMS Christian Cyclopedia says:

(Rabe; 1501–53). B. Warburg; d. Hanover. Expelled from cloister because of his Lutheranism 1523; preacher in Goslar 1528, Witzenhausen 1529; advanced Reformation in Northeim, Hildesheim, and Calenberg-Göttingen; opposed Augsburg Interim; imprisoned 1549–52; works include sermons on the Gospels and Epistles.

The 1927 Concordia Cyclopedia gives a bit more information on him, letting us know that he was more than just "imprisoned":

Corvinus (Rabe) Antonius, b. 1501; chased out of his cloister for his Lutheranism in 1522; preacher in Hessen in 1538; reformed in Goettingen, Nordheim, Hildesheim, Calenberg; opposed the Interim; imprisoned in damp cell 1549 — 52; d. April 5, 1553, a true and faithful Lutheran Christian. His sermons on the Gospels and Epistles became popular.

Hmmm, it seems the LCMS, the New Missouri Synod, stripped the history of the conditions of Corvinus's imprisonment. The German Wikipedia article on him (there is no English one) goes further by adding that (translated):

The prisoners were well fed, could receive and answer mail, and talk to their visitors through an open window. 

Imprisoned by a Catholic ruler, but "well fed", etc. Was it actually an easy imprisonment? Hmmm, sounds like Catholic or "objective" historians inserted these comments into this Wikipedia article to try to soften the story of the imprisonment of Corvinus. But the old German history source Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie or ADB states the following excerpt (translated):

However, when Duke Erich II reverted to the Catholic Church and demanded the acceptance of the [Augsburg] Interim from the Protestant clergy of his country, Corvinus drew up a protest against this imposition signed by the entire Evangelical clergy. He atoned for this step with three years of hard imprisonment at Calenberge (1549-53). Most of his library was scattered and burned by the Spanish and Brabant soldiers who accompanied the young duke; his prison was "such a nasty tower that his clothes rotted off his body." Only at the intercession of Duke Albrecht of Prussia was Corvinus released. But he died very soon from the consequences of his imprisonment in Hanover.

Oh well, it seems the new German (Catholic?) historians want the world to forget the real suffering of Corvinus. — But even more than the old German history, Prof. Friedrich Bente, in his Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books, finally put the proper label on Corvinus's imprisonment, p. 101:

…Antonius Corvinus, Superintendent at Kalenberg-Goettingen, the Lutheran martyr, who, because of his opposition to the Interim, was incarcerated for three years, in consequence of which he died, 1553.

Bente is not exaggerating, as he only uses what was known to old German history — Corvinus's death was a consequence of his imprisonment. He was imprisoned as a Lutheran by a Roman Catholic. Corvinus was a Lutheran martyr. Now we finally get the real history of Corvinus. Unfortunately, Prof. Bente's history is now ignored (by Dr. Robert Kolb), or attacked (by Dr. Lowell Green † 2014) by LCMS historians.  But the LCMS cannot bury Bente's quote of Corvinus's precious testimony about Philip Melanchthon's weakness which gives credence to his, and C. F. W. Walther's, history of Melanchthon. — In the next Part 2, we publish a precious sermonette by Corvinus, a sermon that could hardly have been preached by a more qualified theologian, other than Martin Luther, for Corvinus was… a Lutheran martyr.

- - - - - - - - -  Table of Contents  - - - - - - - - - - 

Part 1: Introduction to Anton Corvinus, Lutheran martyr; differing histories

Part 2: Sermonette for Judica, Sunday before Palm Sunday

Part 3: Palm Sunday: Exhortation to love, humility, and service

Part 4: Easter: Disciples think it a fairy tale

Part 4B: Easter II: Women sent as first preachers… but afterwards?

Part 5: 

Martyrs 22c: Diaz- A monster!... a Lutheran; Chapter 2

Juan Diaz

[2019-10-24: fixed broken links to Google Books] 
      This continues from Part 22b (TOC in Part 1a, Diaz TOC in Part 22a) publishing the book of Hermann Fick on the martyrs of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.  —  Part 22c continues with the second of seven chapters on Juan Diaz, a Spanish Lutheran.  A Spaniard... a Lutheran?  I can still hardly believe this story...  but what takes the breath away is that Diaz was not a "token" Lutheran, but he was a Lutheran spokesman during the time of the Reformation!... a Spaniard!

      There is an article on Diaz in the German Wikipedia here.  It is typical in its attempts to strip him of his Lutheranism by associating Diaz with the "humanists".  But Luther was not a "humanist" in the sense that others like Erasmus were, he was a Lutheran... and so was Diaz.

Some highlighting added hyperlinks added for reference.

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

The Martyrs of the Evangelical Lutheran Church

by C.J. Hermann Fick

(tr. by BackToLuther)

XXII.(c)

Juan Diaz.

Chapter 2

How Malvenda tried to entice the dear Juan Diaz again to the papacy.

Some time later in 1546, Charles V called a Diet at Regensburg.  At this he organized [page 148] a colloquy between evangelical Lutherans and papal theologians, ostensibly to restore the disturbed religious unity, but actually only to gain time for his armaments against those behind the Augsburg Confession. The imperial city of Strasbourg sent to this colloquy, among others, their preacher Bucer, and he requested that his companion be our Diaz, whom he had grown to love equally for his learning, as well as his grace of manners and untiring zeal.

In Regensburg, Diaz met a compatriot whom he had already met in Paris, Peter Malvenda, a treacherous, conceited, arrogant man, who burned with hatred against the Evangelicals or Protestants, as the Lutherans were called at that time.  Although the same by no means sought harmony and peace, nevertheless he intended, together with some others on the Papal side, to carry on the conversation with the evangelical divines.  As soon as our Diaz came into his view, he was horrified, as if he had seen a great monster.  He crossed and blessed himself with the highest amazement, and finally said to him: "I thought I saw a ghost and I'm very scared to find you here in Germany, and moreover, among the Protestants, who are rejoicing over the defection of one Spaniard more than if they had converted ten thousand Germans or a large number of other nations."

Whereupon Malvenda asked him why he came to Germany, how long he had been there and whether he approved of Bucer's teaching.  Diaz replied politely and humbly that he was in Germany for about six months.  He had come there to get to know the improved religion.  For it must be the main concern of Christians to attain the true knowledge of God and his Holy and gracious will from his Word and to keep it.  One may not however judge the truth by the corrupt opinions of the human brain, but by the infallible guide of the divine Word.  That's why he had preferred in such an important matter to check everything with his own eyes, rather than believe the evil slanders of bad people.  As then a wise man well stands, and the Apostle Paul commands: Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. [1 Thess. 5:21]  In such examination, he had convinced himself that the doctrine of the Evangelicals was in no way contrary to the doctrine of the orthodox ancient teachers and [page 149] Church Fathers.  With a good conscience he could therefore not revile nor discard these doctrines corresponding with the prophets and apostles, which he had sought for so long and sees now restored.  Then Malvenda answered by twisting his face into a kind of superstitious amazement: "Surely, six months in Germany come for a pious man not as mere months, but as whole years, indeed as like so many centuries before, so disgusting it is to live in Germany for those who love the unity with the Roman Church and honor its reputation.  At least I can honestly confess for myself that I age in Germany in six days as elsewhere in six full years, since these people now for twenty years hear no other doctrine and read no other books than that of their own teachers."

More noteworthy, however, is a long conversation held between Malvenda and Diaz, which instead was found later and which Senarcle wrote down from the mouth of Diaz.

Malvenda began: "I warned you the other day, Diaz, that you forsake this society in which you are now, and return again in obedience to the Roman Pontiff and the religion of our ancestors, according to your former manner.  I've decided to do the same again now.  But if you will not follow my faithful admonition, I foresee now already in spirit the dreadful dangers of body and soul which approach you.  Because you can be sure of this and I think you know it too well already, that all those who with knowledge and consent have fellowship with the Lutherans will be excommunicated by the Roman Pope. And they will be hit by a terrible excommunication so that no one other than the Roman Pope himself, the vicar of Christ, can free them of it.  However, this ban, which, as identified, is based on divine right, is not to be despised.  For the same emerged from Christ and the Apostle’s foundation, from there transferred to the Vicar of Christ and the successor of the Apostles, by which the supreme power judges to bind and loose, as one must believe, and now used according to divine order for punishment of the wicked.  But as you know, it is commanded by the God’s clearest word that one may neither eat nor speak with one excommunicated by the church, but that [page 150] one should hold him condemned as a cut-off member from the body of Christ and as a pernicious plague of the human race.  Further, when the concern for your life or the salvation of your soul should not quench you of your reprehensible resolution, yet would truly love for your country and the old religion of your ancestors, that we must fairly prefer to our life and happiness, hold you from your perishable opinion.  For what will the rest of the nations say, when they see of you alone would despise and deny the religion of your fatherland, its stability in the observation of all arrangements, whose loyalty and incorruptibility is admired by the remaining peoples, wherefore all who desire the preservation of the ancient religion of our ancestors, fix their eyes on our Spain, as a fortress of religion, or at least to focus their attention on a magnificent example of strength and courage.  Finally, it is insanity and a great madness that you believe you alone have in the doctrine of religion gained more light than so many thousands of people were able to see so many centuries. And even if it were true, so one did not have to proceed so riotously and not immediately, for the sake of the opinion of a few people, violate the well-ordered constitution of his country, nor yet disturb the peace of the state.  Therefore I beg you again that you care for your salvation, that you fear God's judgment, that you hearken unto the cry of your country, which does not complain just about you adding wrong to it, but cries with a loud voice and requests the recantation of that pernicious opinion.  But I urge you not only in this matter gently and amicably, but I promise you also, that you should not lack my help and service if you want to follow in this my advice which I hold useful and salutary for you.  Therefore, do not wait if you want to listen to me, until the Emperor comes to Regensburg, which perhaps could not happen without injury to you, but rather take yourself to him, prostrate yourself at the feet of his confessor at his court, a pious and wise man, and beg forgiveness for your crimes committed and for mercy." [page 151]

= = = = = = = = = = = =   Cont'd in Part 22d  = = = = = = = = = = = =

      The horror on Malvenda's face!... he thought he was seeing A MONSTER!... a Ghost!... but what Malvenda saw was a true Spanish Lutheran.  No Hollywood-Halloween movie could portray more terror than Malvenda had when he saw his old Spanish acquaintance at Regensburg... for the Lutherans.  The surprise I had when I first discovered this portion on Spanish martyrs pales in comparison with the shock of the Spaniard Malvenda!  As far as I have seen, no other commonly available history of Juan Diaz describes this detail like our dear author, Pastor Hermann Fick.
      A striking portion describes Diaz as one of the speakers for the Protestants, i.e. the Lutherans, after Luther's death during the Diet of Regensburg in 1546.  Ask yourself then – was Diaz a Lutheran... when he (so to speak) in part took the place of Martin Luther as the mouth of the Lutherans?  —  The German Wikipedia article on the Diet of Regensburg, 1546, does not mention Juan Diaz's name on the side of the evangelical Lutherans, but Hermann Fick does.  And we gain perhaps the deepest understanding of what happened theologically at this time of the Reformation by this history by Pastor Hermann Fick.  I wonder (without having studied this in detail) that Juan Diaz spoke more eloquently for the Lutherans than even Martin Bucer did, who later wavered on some points with the Reformed.  —  In the next Part 22d is Chapter 3...

LDJ–Pt 25 (p72-74)—Antinomianism; Reformation Age... again? Essay ends, Endnotes begin

     This continues from the previous Part 24 presenting a new translation of C.F.W. Walther's seminal essay in 1859 (see Part 1 for Table of Contents).  In this Part 25, Walther finishes the main portion of his essay with a bang (read on).  And he says this at the end of a footnote, quite a fortuitous statement:

But since it is not the essayist’s [Walther] issue to show how justification is to be rightly preached, he breaks off this matter, leaving the solution of this important task to one more experienced and to another time.

==>> Dear Prof. Walther, there was no one more experienced than you and it was you who later taught us The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel. [text here]
     Then begins the Endnotes section and I will hyperlink each endnote to its original section.  Endnotes [A] and [B] are in this section.  These Endnotes are pure Walther even though they are presented in a format of a "discussion".  Wherever Walther was in attendance at any convention of the old (German) Missouri Synod, or at any ecumenical discussions (e.g. Pastoral Conferences), you can be absolutely certain the essay and discussions that ensued were trustworthy whether they were presented by Walther or another person.  Why?  Because Walther would never let bad theology or unclear statements be published without correction.
     Contained in this section is a footnote where Walther answers the so-called Antinomians, or those who would do away with the preaching of the Law.  Walther's caution against Antinomians trumps all of today's theologians who purport to defend against this error.  Why?  Because Walther (and Luther) taught the pure sweet Gospel properly distinguished from the Law... and so when Walther preached the Law, it was presented for its true spiritual purpose - it killeth. (2 Cor. 3:6)

    Underlining follows Walther's emphasis in original.  Hypertext links have been copiously added for reference to original sources and on several subjects.  Highlighting is mine.

= = = = = = = = = = = =  Part 25: Pages 72-74 (1880)  = = = = = = = = = = = =

(cont'd from Part 24)

The Lutheran Doctrine of Justification.

[by C.F.W. Walther]

the pure doctrine of justification [1880-72] as the root, the central point, and the crown of all doctrine. (*) [Endnote W] [W1859-52]

2. On the part of the listeners, however, it will be necessary above all that they be introduced to this pure pasture of the sweet Gospel, which alone makes one willing and cheerful for good works, also in particular that they be established in Luther’s writings and have awakened within them the joy of reading the same, the understanding of them

–––––––––––––––

*) Hereby, we finally notice,  it is in no way meant that also the Law should not and must not be preached in all its sharpness, rather the pure doctrine of justification puts such preaching ahead, without which preaching of the Law it can not be pure at all.  The justification preached in the fullness of its comfort is in no way the saltless sweetish Herrnhutish [see Moravian Church] playing with comforting features of the Gospel. In fact, even the constant prominence of comforting [truths] is not the essence of pure, uncurtailed preaching of the doctrine of justification.  Not every preacher can, given the differing natures of the congregations, give consolation to the same extent as Luther did in his early writings.  He speaks of this himself as follows: “Therefore the antinomians (Law strikers) justly deserve to have everyone hostile towards them as they would try to remain and defend with our example; even though it is manifest why we taught about God’s  [Essays1-55] grace in the beginning as we did.  The cursed pope had fully suppressed poor consciences with his man-made traditions, had taken away all true means, help, and comfort with which poor, fearful hearts might have been saved from despair: what, then, should we have done at that time other than again to raise up the oppressed and burdened hearts and hold out true consolation?  But we also know well that one must speak differently to those who are flush, tender and fat.  At that time we were all cast out and exceedingly miserable.  The water in the bottle was gone, that is, there was no comfort available. We were lying there dying, just like Ishmael under the shrub.  Therefore we needed such teachers who presented the grace of God to us and taught us how we might be refreshed. But the antinomians would have it that one must begin the doctrine of repentance simply with grace; but I myself did not proceed in this manner.  For I well knew that Ishmael was first driven out and despondent before he was comforted by an angel.  Therefore I followed that example and comforted no one except only those who first felt remorse and sorrow for their sin and had despaired of themselves, whom the Law had frightened, whom Leviathan had crushed and totally stunned.” (On Gen. 21:15-16, [Walch vol. 1, cols 2144-2145, paragrs. 174-176; StL Ed. vol 1, cols. 1428-1429, paragrs 2144-2145; cf. Am. Ed. vol. 4, 50 f.])  But since it is not the essayist’s issue to show how justification is to be rightly preached, he breaks off this matter, leaving the solution of this important task to one more experienced and to another time.

––––––––––––

[1880-73] be conveyed and developed, be shown, without exception, the essential distinction and advantage between them and all other human devotional tracts, and pointed to the proper use of the treasures contained therein of luminous knowledge and deep Christian experience.

The essayist does not doubt that if this happens, not only would soon return to its members the faded consciousness that the Evangelical Lutheran Church alone has been entrusted with the pure doctrine of Justification, but with the return thereof by the repossession of this most precious doctrinal jewel, the blessing would be renewed like the age of the Reformation which was so rich, comparable only with that of the apostles.

––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––

There were in-depth discussions, whose summary is included in the following on the reading of each point.  Everyone will readily see that the Synod did not only let Luther, etc., speak, but that the presenter’s own heart has played a part.  The well-disposed reader will want to remember that in such a completely open conference the comments on this or that point in the essay often anticipated what really belonged to one of the following points.  Still it will be dear to many and they will be served toward better understanding by the fact that we have shown through back and forth  looking references with roman letters, the points of the essay referred to by the relevant comments.

[A] It is mostly a matter of tradition to praise the article of justification by faith alone as the main doctrine: but very few fully appreciate the wealth of wonderful testimonies of our fathers on this point and the incomparable confession contained therein; yes, for the most part they do not understand what justifying [1880-74] faith is, and often take the word faith for the whole Christian religion, as everyone imagines it in his own way.  If the sects read these testimonies, so they agree well with the praise of faith, but they take their devotion, their feelings, and their activity to be faith, while Luther by it understands nothing else than the sole vision towards God’s promises and seizing and appropriating them, despite the fact that the heart sees nothing but sin and wrath, death and damnation, but he understands the faith of the sects as a dream and foam faith.  We ourselves are far from understanding the pertinent testimonies in their full power, so that we have continued to study on it, how Luther drew forth this article of justification from the well of God’s Word, where he will then become so new to us again every day, as if we never heard him before. [W1859-53]

[B] One often does not know why Luther calls the article of justifying faith difficult, which nevertheless seems so easy to many; but such one does not understand Luther.  For many it may, through God’s grace, not be so difficult to have a good sermon on justification: but Luther speaks here about the whole nature and way of treating the work of Christ in such a way that not only every other doctrine is influenced by the doctrine of justification, but that it appears as its necessary component.  That is hard — so hard that no fanatical spirit, no one who does not have the Holy Spirit can somehow do it.  Incidentally to note, we can and should learn from this to judge Luther differently than it usually happens today, since in many cases what is called his weakness is just his strength. — Luther wants to know all other doctrines drawn from the depths of the doctrine of justification; whatever does not flow from it is for him a shameful denial of Christ.  If we compel the doctrine of justifying faith in this way, it will [1880-75] become evident that the sects (Methodists, followers of [Jacob] Albright [Albrechtsleute, see Evangelical Association], etc.)...

= = = = = = = = =  cont'd in Part 26  = = = = = = = = =

So many quotes to take from this section. The editor of this essay's publication injected this comment as he spoke for his Missouri Synod about the essayist Walther:

Everyone will readily see that the Synod did not only let Luther, etc., speak, but that the presenter’s own heart has played a part.

This statement shows that the old (German) Missouri Synod knew that the essayist Walther who stood before them had a heart like that of Martin Luther himself.  Yes, even the glorious splendor of the age of the Reformation was returning before their very eyes and ears.  No wonder President Wyneken was so thrilled at Walther's essay as he extolled it in his speech before the 1860 Synod convention (see here). — Later on Walther said this:

...we can and should learn ... to judge Luther differently than it usually happens today, since in many cases what is called his weakness is just his strength.

Are you listening, editors at CPH and editors Mayes and Brown of the American Edition of Luther's Works?
In the next Part 26...

500th Anniversary of Reformation–2017 (à la Sasse?)

Today is November 1, the day after Reformation Day, October 31.

In preparing for further comments on Prof. Roland Ziegler's essay on the Book of Concord, I have been forced to read the writings not only of Hermann Sasse, but also of those in today's LC-MS who have set up Sasse as their current theological leader... and there are many.  And so as I read what happened in the LC-MS during the 450th anniversary of the Reformation in 1967, I wonder that the upcoming 500th Anniversary "celebration" in the LC-MS (4 years from now) will be rather a celebration of Hermann Sasse, with only a passing superficial nod to the only Reformer... Martin Luther.

It is a heavy thing for me to read of Hermann Sasse...  I would not be doing it except that Prof. Ziegler seemed to understand the theology of C.F.W. Walther...  I hope!  There is a contradiction between Sasse and Walther (and Pieper) in many respects...