(This blog is being published out of order, but it pertains to an earlier blog in this series)
This continues from Part EC3a (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have seemingly been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — Recent readings have brought to light a glaring example of non-confessionalism by one of the leading lights among LC–MS theologians. How I was able to determine this was from reading Walther's highly instructive defense against the German theologian Wilhelm Loehe in the matter of defective forms of "confessionalism". One may read the particular excerpt that brings out Walther's teaching in Part EC3 of this series. At the 1858 Western District convention, Walther identified seven forms of conditional acceptance of the Confessions. The following is the third:
A third kind of conditional recognition of the symbols is when one expresses it in this way: one subscribes to them [Lutheran Confessions] if one only interprets or understands them according to Scripture or correctly. Even the Reformed have declared their willingness to sign the Unaltered Augsburg Confession under this condition. … With such additions, that one wishes to subscribe to the symbols if one may understand them correctly, it cannot of course be said that one may understand them as they read and are really meant, for only a madman can want to demand a different understanding; these additions rather indicate that one cannot accept them as they read, and that one therefore requires to be able to connect with the words of the symbol a meaning which does not lie in them, but which one considers to be the right Biblical one.
Now it may sound nice to promote the idea of evaluating theological writings "according to Scripture". But "confessional statements" are not ordinary writings, they are statements to which true Lutherans subscribe to as their own confession before God. They recognize the Confessions as agreeing with Scripture, and therefore no longer need further "interpretation" or "correct understanding" among Lutherans. Walther has beautifully exposed the error of this conditional recognition. With Walther's instruction, we are ready to judge a well known LC–MS theologian.
Dr. Martin H. Franzmann († 1976) is routinely referenced and praised among LC–MS pastors and theologians for his knowledge and exposition of Scripture, his hermeneutics. His works were referenced several times in the LC–MS text book Confessing the Gospel. Concordia Publishing House continues to sell 5 of his books. He was deeply involved in the discussions with the old American Lutheran Church (ALC) during the 1960s before leaving the U.S. for England in 1969. A leading theologian of the ALC, Prof. Edward C. Fendt, wrote about these discussions in his historical book The Struggle for Lutheran Unity and Consolidation in the U.S.A. from the Late 1930's to the Early 1970's. Written from the perspective of the opposing body of the LC–MS, it was nevertheless quite informative on the LC–MS theologians who were involved during this controversial period. One of those theologians was Martin Franzmann. And what did Prof. Fendt report of Dr. Franzmann? On p. 192-193, he stated:
“Dr. [Martin] Franzmann was committed to look at confessional…statements in the light of the Holy Scriptures, not to look at the Scriptures in the light of confessional…statements. At times he was initially a minority of one in this respect while serving on the LC-MS Committee on Doctrinal Unity, but with the honest leadership [?] of Drs. [John] Behnken and Oliver Harms it was not too long until Dr. Franzmann spoke for the entire group.”
So we see that while Walther warns against recognizing the Confessions conditionally, or one who "only interprets or understands them according to Scripture", Franzmann did just that. He even convinced all of his committee members and two Synod presidents to follow his position. (Honest leadership?) One could wonder that Fendt did not represent Franzmann's position correctly, but they were co-authors of a 1967 essay, "What Commitment to the 'Sola Gratia' of the Lutheran Confessions Involves", which was published in the Synod's Convention Workbook (download here). Franzmann's conditional attitude toward "confessional statements" does not surprise me as he also reportedly denied the plain meaning of John 10:35.
What prompted Franzmann to this conditional attitude? It was because he was a closet unionist. A conditional recognition of the Confessions was the position of the opposing ALC (and Prof. Fendt), which was the position of its father Wilhelm Loehe. Walther called out Loehe, in his 1858 Western District convention essay, on his so-called "confessionalism" (again Part EC3):
“In a similar spirit [as the Reformed and Calvin!], a few years ago an entire conference of Lutheran preachers gathered in Fuerth in Bavaria, headed by Pastor Loehe in Neuendettelsau in Bavaria, encouraged our Synod to understand and interpret the Symbols [i.e. 'confessional statements'] according to Scripture.”
Franzmann was following Loehe's work-around of the Confessions. According to Prof. Fendt, Dr. Franzmann's commitment "to look at confessional … statements in the light of the Holy Scriptures" is exactly the same position as what the Reformed, Calvin, and Wilhelm Loehe held. Fendt, Franzmann, and today's LC–MS theologians who follow Franzmann in this regard are exposing themselves and their confession as "quatenus", not in full agreement, instead of "quia", or full agreement. Walther, the far better theologian knew exactly how to spot a less than confessional theologian.
Again, this can be somewhat deceptive, because it sounds so nice, because it seems to hold up Scripture. Franzmann's attitude towards Holy Scripture sounds solid. But the problem lies in what "confessional" means. To be a true Lutheran, one confesses that the Book of Concord is Scriptural! To now "look at [or judge] confessional statements" means to reverse one's confession because it calls into question one's own confession.
May God help me and the reader to find and confess that the Confessions are the true teaching of Holy Scripture! Amen! (In the next Part EC4 we uncover again Walther's love for the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification.)