Fendt's history of LC–MS: precursor to CHI book on Walkout issues (Part 1 of 3)

      This blog series was prompted when I discovered that the Internet Archive has recently (February 25, 2023) scanned and made available to borrow a book that provides more of the "inside story" of the early downfall of the LC–MS, from the early decades before much of the history presented in Concordia Historical Institute's (CHI, 2024) Rediscovering the Issues Surrounding the 1974 Concordia Seminary Walkout. The 1980 book is The Struggle for Lutheran Unity and Consolidation in the U.S.A. from the Late 1930's to the Early 1970's, by Edward C. Fendt, a professor in the old ALC which merged into today's ELCA. It was written in 1978, 4 years after the 1974 Walkout staged at Concordia Seminary, and was published by the Augsburg Publishing of the old ALC. I have blogged about this book in the past in 2011 (here and here; search "Fendt") but its importance needs to be once again pointed out. It is a good basis and companion for the CHI book released in 2024, 50 years after the 1974 Walkout, and edited by Dr. Ken Schurb. Fendt's book is a good source for those who want to know more of the historical events and people that led up to what Prof. Kurt Marquart referred to as an "Explosion".

      Fendt's book contains accounts of surprising "infighting" within the LC-MS teachers, and of the doctrinal issues, in the following:

Notable Quotes:

83: "If the members present had known how Dr. [Theo.] Graebner felt about the Doctrinal Affirmation they might have called for his resignation as one of the co-editors of the Lutheran Witness."

85: “A Statement” of the 44 signers reprinted

93: "The ALC commissioners declared that we hold to the same truth which they term Objective Justification even though we may prefer such terms as Atonement and Reconciliation." [ALC shows its weakness or even denial of Objective Justification.]

94: "Dr. Fendt: 'It's also a problem of language. The evangelical Pieper becomes cold and didactic in Mueller’s Dogmatics. The only objection the Columbus faculty had to the Doctrinal Affirmation was its poor, archaic English.'" [Fendt labels “evangelical Pieper”!  But he does not call Pieper’s Brief Statement “evangelical”!]

 95: "Matzner [ALC]: We object to 'objective justification’ as you [LC–MS] object to 'intuiti fidei'; to us they are on par." … "[J.H.C.] Fritz: Universal, or objective, justification is the basis for subjective justification." [Thank you Prof. Fritz!! Clear evidence that the ALC erred on the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification.]

 

191-2: Fendt, of the ALC, speaks highly of Prof. Martin Franzmann, but that Franzmann was an unhappy man in the LC–MS.

192-193: Fendt: “Dr. Franzmann was committed to look at confessional and synodical statements in the light of the Holy Scriptures, not to look at the Scriptures in the light of confessional or synodical statements.” [See this blog post, Franzmann's conditional confession.”]

 233-239: Prof. Julius Bodensieck, of the old ALC, wrote a venomness essay against inerrancy of Holy Scripture. Yet the LC–MS was in fellowship with the ALC for a time!

235: Bodensieck: "which of the text forms is supposed to be the 'inerrant' one? Is it the 'Received Text' from which Luther translated the New Testament into German, and from which the Authorized Version was made?  Or is it the Hebrew Old Testament in Kittel's edition or Nestle's Greek New Testament text? The usual escape from the dilemma is to retreat behind the original autographic copies of the biblical books and to assert their total inerrancy. But this escape is illusory" [Franz Pieper addressed all these concerns masterfully in his Christian Dogmatics, p. 232 ff.; CSL Prof. Joel Biermann speaks much like Bodensieck.]

236: Bodensieck: "The third term used in the description of the Word of God is 'inerrant'. I have alluded to it above. A few more words are necessary here.  I assume that this term has the purpose here of eliminating the possibility of assuming that any geographical, biological, astronomical, historical statement in the Bible may be in error." [I addressed the "astronomical" in my Copernicanism series.]

237: Bodensieck: "...earmarks of current Fundamentalism." [This was the charge of the liberals in the LC–MS]

237: Bodensieck: "It [inerrancy] is Docetic, in that it denies the reality of the fact that while the Bible is the Word of God it is in every moment also the word of man. [This is the teaching of today's LC–MS.] Such a 'theologia gloriae' endangers the doctrine of the Person of Christ, robs Christianity of its essential historicity, and reduces the Bible to the level of the Koran which is held by Islam to be, in the Fundamentalistic sense, a 'heavenly', suprarational, inerrant book. Luther's statements concerning the Scriptures, it should be remembered, were dynamic-Christological, completely oriented to the mystery of the Incarnation. Did not Christ come into the world in the form of a Servant? And is it not precisely this aspect which needs to be stressed: The Word of God became flesh in the Person of Jesus Christ, and, in the same manner, the Word of God can now, in the Bible, be read in the words and languages of man? [Bodensieck speaks for today’s LC-MS! SCR1886 acknowledges this assertion and completely refutes it!]

238: Bodensieck: "If we argue that the Bible is inspired because it claims inspiredness for itself [B. is confessing that he does not believe the Bible is inspired, as the Apostle Paul does, 2 Tim. 3:16], and that therefore its statements are correct and that therefore we may safely erect our theological systematic superstructure on that basis, we argue in a circle, and it may easily happen [not sure?] that the whole structure collapses because the foundation proved to be untenable, indefensible, and treacherous."

- - - - - - - - -  Cont'd in Part 2  - - - - - - - - -

      Prof. Bodiensieck, although a vehement opponent to the inerrancy of the Bible, was more honorable than those who tried to hide their opposition, like many (most?) in today's LC–MS. As mentioned previously, Herman Sasse also made the false charge of "docetic" against inerrancy. — In the next Part 2…

Table of Contents 

Part 1: Fendt's history of LC–MS: precursor to CHI book on Walkout issues

Part 2:  Behnken, Bohlmann, the Preus cousins

Part 3: Franzmann's & Graebner's halting speech, tears

LCMS moderate didn't "Walkout", but should have (on Science and the Bible)

[2024-06-06: added reference page link to Hausmann's book in red below]

     While reviewing the latest book in the Concordia Historical Institute's (CHI) "Monograph Series", Rediscovering the Issues Surrounding the 1974 Concordia Seminary Walkout, (only $19.99!). I discovered a reference to a book, authored by an LC-MS pastor, that I was previously unaware of.  The reference was made by Rev. Dr. Armand Boehme in his essay "Creation and the Fall".  The essay is generally commendable in revealing the history of the change of doctrine by the teachers in the LC-MS, although I would suggest that the door to evolutionary teaching began even before the 1950s (p. 175). His references to support the literal meaning of Genesis 1-3 from Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions was most helpful. My upload of the famous "Blue Book" to the Internet Archive will also aid readers to follow the many references to that book by Dr. Boehme, and also by the other CHI essayists. 

 

Rev. William John Hausmann

    The book in question was Science and the Bible in Lutheran theology: from Luther to the Missouri Synod authored by Rev. Dr. William John Hausmann (1930-2015, obituary, Legacy) in 1978 (free to borrow for 1-hour periods).  This book, along with several other references in the CHI book, are available to read for free for 1-hour borrowing periods on the Internet Archive. This book was a dissertation for his PhD degree from Drew University.  When one researches his affiliation, we find that not only was he born into the LC-MS, he evidently did not leave it during the infamous "Walkout" of 1974, since one finds that he was an "Interim Pastor" at an LC-MS church in Pennsylvania after his retirement in 1990. 

      What is significant about this is that Dr. Boehme reveals on page 179, footnote # 43, that Hausmann gave a "positive view of [Prof. Norman] Habel’s essay" (2024-06-06: on p. 107-109). Who was Prof. Habel?  He was one of the Concordia Seminary professors who joined the "Walkout" of 1974.  What did Habel teach? According to Dr. Boehme, he taught according to the "historical-critical method" (p. 74, 177) and that Genesis 3 was a "symbolic religious history". 

       So Hausmann's public "positive view" in 1978 of Habel's and Concordia Seminary's teaching, 4 years after the "Walkout" in 1974, demonstrates that although the LC-MS seemed to have won the "Battle for the Bible", it had not fully done so — by disciplining those who still sympathized with the "Walkout" teachings. Hausmann speaks of his own duplicity in his pastorate on pages 113-114, saying that although he would not preach about his actual belief of "accommodation" with "science" in his sermons, yet 

"Bible classes, Sunday school, confirmation instruction appear to be the place to discuss in detail the relationship between science and Scripture, the theological, philosophical, and scientific problems, questions, and possible solutions that would arise from such a dialogue", 

… that is, the "accommodating" relationship between Scripture and "science falsely so-called" (1 Timothy 6:20).

      This seemingly small situation has larger implications, for it demonstrates that Dr. Boehme is in fellowship with the Synod that found room for pastors, such as Hausmann, who publicly did not believe the official Scriptural teaching of the Synod. (Hausmann even claimed Luther for his "accommodating" cause.) It demonstrates that the "Issues" addressed in the CHI book were never fully resolved… to this day, not withstanding CHI's efforts to speak otherwise. 

      More on the CHI book on the "Walkout" to come…

"Christian Cyclopedia" drops Name Abbreviations: "Walkout" history or "Cancel culture"?

[2024-12-26: One may see the complete printed list of about 250 "contributors" on the Internet Archive copy of the 1975 edition HERE.]

      This follows the previous post presenting a 1965 listing of all the Concordia Seminary professors up to that year.  While researching that post, it was discovered that the well-known "Christian Cyclopedia" has recently, mysteriously dropped their listing of abbreviations for the names of the authors of its articles.  That list was the only way to determine who actually was behind their history writing. When I clicked on my previous link to call up that web page, the "Name abbreviations" were gone. Further research using the Wayback Machine determined that the web page was dropped between February and August of this year – 2023. 

Missing webpage (as of 2023)

One may go to the last viable Archived web page from February 2023 here, but then in August the Wayback message "Got an HTTP 302 response at crawl time" appeared briefly before reverting to the home page. Now this omission could be an oversight by the LC-MS web administrator but that would hinder a 2023 Synod resolution that 

"…calls on members of the Synod to study the history [of the 1974 Walkout] and make use of resources from Concordia Historical Institute, Concordia Publishing House and the seminaries on the subject."

So if the Synod assembly is encouraging the study of the history of the "Walkout", why then withdraw one of the resources, the webpage that names the names of several prominent "Walkout" professors (F. Danker, C. S. Meyer, etc.),  and sympathizers (A. C. Piepkorn, etc.), who wrote for their "Christian Cyclopedia"?

Why indeed… — More is forthcoming on the LC-MS's observance of the "50th anniversary" of the 1974 "Walkout". Just how will they "Give Thanks for Preservation of the Gospel"? Will they also "Give Thanks" for upholding the authority of Holy Scripture? Is the Synod really to "Give Thanks"?… or not?

Concordia Sem profs—1839-1965: Orthodoxy to Walkout; 2023 LC-MS resolution on "Walkout" of 1974

      This post is to offer a convenient online listing of Concordia Seminary's professors originally published in C. S. Meyer's Log Cabin to Luther Tower,  CPH 1965, p. 297-300. This book was recently made available to borrow on the Internet Archive.  Below is the text from Appendix I of that book, with my emphasis of certain names. I have added separator lines to indicate who was installed after certain notable orthodox teachers had passed away or retired. My interest was mostly to find out who Profs. Walther, Pieper, and Engelder served with. If you want to find out who was installed after Prof. Theodore Engelder "went home", then you can click on the "Continue Reading…" link at bottom and scroll down to the years after 1946. — Because this list was published in 1965, it lacks the year of termination for many of the professors installed after the passing of Profs. Franz Pieper and Theo. Engelder. 

      The 2023 convention of the LC-MS had a resolution (4-07) adopted by voice vote that highlighted the 1974 Walkout, and it was reported that this resolution

“takes note of the 50th anniversary on Feb. 19, 2024, of the “Walkout” from Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, and directs the Synod to 'give thanks for the preservation of the Gospel in our midst' and for the faithful teaching of the seminaries.”

One can take a look at the names of those missing an ending year below to see most of the names of those involved. Most of these likely participated, or were willing to participate, in the "Walkout".  One can cross-reference the following list with the list I presented of "Walkout" authors for the LC-MS "Christian Cyclopedia" website here and here. Also one may cross-reference this list with those who signed the infamous "Statement of the 44" in 1944/1945. More will be forthcoming that is pertinent to the "50th Anniversary". (See note at bottom.)

APPENDIX I—CONCORDIA SEMINARY PROFESSORS: 1839-1965
Brohm, Theodor Julius	1839-1843; 1858-1878 1 (From 1858 to 1878 on a part-time basis.)
Fuerbringer, Ottomar	1839-1842
Buenger, Johann Friedrich	1839-1840
Loeber, Gotthold Heinrich	1841-1849
Goenner, Johann Jacob	1843-1861
Walther, Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm	1849-1887
Biewend, Adolph Friedrich Theodor	1850-1858
Saxer, Alexander	1856-1861
Seyffarth, Gustav	1856-1859
Schick, Georg	1856-1863
Larsen, Lauritz	1859-1861
Lange, C. H. Rudolph	1858-1861; 1878-1892
Craemer, Friedrich August	1861-1875
Brauer, Ernst August	1863-1872
Baumstark, H. M.	1864-1869
Preuss, F. R. Eduard	1869-1871
Schaller, Johann Michael Gottlieb	1872-1887
Schmidt, Friedrich August	1872-1876
Guenther, Martin	1873-1893
Pieper, Franz August Otto	1878-1931
Stoeckhardt, Karl Georg	1879-1913 2 (From 1879—1881 on a part-time basis)
- - - - Post Walther years - - - - (click "Continue Reading..." link below for balance of list)

50 years ago, Prof. Klug sounded the alarm: “silence is not only questionable but culpable”

      A year ago the LC-MS celebrated what they called their 175th anniversary.  Of course, that only applies to the Old (German) Missouri Synod. —

      A little over 50 years ago, the faculty of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, published a pamphlet that caused one professor in the LC-MS, from Springfield, Illinois, to rise up and loudly warn against it. In June 1973, 50 years ago, in an obscure group of "Book Reviews", appeared an explosive 8-page book review of this St. Louis faculty pamphlet. It was published in the journal The Springfielder. In 2003, CTQ Editor Prof. David P. Scaer stated in his eulogy for the author of that "Book Review", Prof. Eugene E. A. Klug (CTQ 67:3/4, July/October 2003, p. 195): 

“Dr. Klug played a prominent part at the 1973 Denver [sic: New Orleans] Convention of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod in defining the synod's theology in the face of its new definition espoused by the faculty of Concordia Seminary, Saint Louis. Just before that convention, he provided an extensive critique of that faculty's theological position, Faithful to Our Calling, Faithful to our Lord in The Springfielder (37:1 [June 1973], p. 67-74.)”

One may read what Dr. Scaer is referring to in the 1973 New Orleans Convention Proceedings, p. 37, and pp. 133-139, and especially pp. 136-138. 

      Because Prof. Klug's "Book Review" is so pivotal in the history of the LC-MS (perhaps even more so than that of Pres. J. A. O. Preus) during that tumultuous time, I am publishing a polished OCR text version of it with added hyperlinks and highlighting.  But before that, I present a few choice quotes from the pen of Dr. Klug:

• …the vortex of the cauldron that caused synod's pot to boil over and was threatening now to blow things sky high.
• …the faculty had need to account for in a responsible way at this serious juncture in synod’s history, and that they have failed to do
• superficial and subtly inadequate theologizing
• Much of the old familiar language is still there, but with new, unfamiliar, and unwelcome theology.
• …then silence is not only questionable but culpable
• many pastors are willing to let the dust settle as it may, indifferent to what’s going on and how it will come out.
• throwing overboard the only principle which Lutheran theology has ever recognized as authoritative and final in establishing all articles of faith, the Scriptural Word of God
• “Is the faculty position different from what Missouri taught previously? Of course it is.”
• No call for a doxology “of praise and wonder” can hide the spirit of agnosticism which hides behind the veiled language
• The issue turns on this question, whether the Missouri Synod will remain what she was till now, a Confessional evangelical Lutheran church!

Below follows Dr. Klug's full essay:

A DOCX file of the above may be downloaded here.

One may read more of the history of what resulted from Dr. Klug's momentous essay here. — May  this 50th anniversary re-publication of the essay of the dear Prof. Eugene Klug be a guide for readers in judging their own teachers of theology today! Amen!