Pieper's Dogmatic, v. 1 (Reformation Day 2023)

* * *  Reformation Day, 2023  * * *

————————————————————————————

      This post continues from the previous post presenting a new English translation of Dr. Franz Pieper's 3-volume Christliche Dogmatik series of books. — It is fitting to present a volume of Franz Pieper's greatest work on this Reformation Day as his books brought to me Luther, loud and clear, as I was returning to my Christian faith after a lapse. Following Volume 2, we present Volume 1 in a modified DeepL machine translation.  The same comments apply from the first post on Volume 2. (The hyperlinks have been vastly updated. Every page has a link to the approximate 1950 CPH translation page.) 

Notable Quotes:

VI: “…our teachers continued to admonish us not to substitute any human authority, not even the authority of Luther and the symbolic books, for the divine authority of Scripture”

8: “there are not a thousand, nor four, but only two essentially different religions in the world: the religion of the Law, that is, the effort to reconcile with God by way of one's own human works, and the religion of the Gospel.”

61: Luther: “Let them cry and rave, 'Church, Church!'; without God's Word it is nothing.”

68-69: “They label the drawing of Christian doctrine from Scripture with a whole series of evil names such as: Intellectualism, Biblicism, literal theology, mechanical view of Scripture”

72: “All the apologetic activity that stands at our disposal is not able to change the human heart”

102: “The "happy inconsistency" is followed by the "unhappy consequence". … the rejection of baptism and the Lord's Supper as means of grace has led Reformed people to consistently reject even the external Word of the Gospel as a means of grace.”

113: “All extra-biblical material, whether it concerns language or historical circumstances, must not be decisive in exegesis.”

114: “In the Christian Church everything depends on doctrine,” [Not liturgy.]

134: “modern theologians… make "problems" out of the very doctrines that are clearly taught in Scripture.”

187: “This criticism [Repristination Theology] applies especially to the Missouri Synod and its writings. Dr. Walther, to whom, however, the leading role among the fathers of the Missouri Synod is rightly attributed…”

192: Walther: "Come and see!… see whether there is a so-called dead orthodoxism and not rather a living experiential knowledge that has matured under inner struggles!”

217: Luther: “I do not want peace and unity if one loses the Word of God”

225: “Unfortunately, we [Missourians] have been met with the same bitterness on the part of the theologians of Germany that we have been met with in this country”

238: “The Unitarians stand extra ecclesiam [outside the Church].”

260: “Scripture is neither a human nor a "God-man" account of God's Word… but God's Word itself.”

280: “He who denies the inspiration of Scripture,… destroys… the foundation of the Christian Church, because,… the Christian Church is built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets.”

284: “By the human side, which they have at heart, they mean the alleged errors in Scripture.”

287: “…the word of Christ has really been preserved. We know this a priori, from the divine promise.”

363: “The Jews based their sonship to God on their bodily descent from Abraham.”

371: Walther: “Beware, beware, I say, of this 'divine-human Scripture'! It is the devil's mask!”

384: “Luther… says…that Scripture is the only book in which no historical errors can occur”

424: “Roman theologians defended themselves against the doctrine of the Scriptures, that also the "laity" could and should judge in matters of doctrine on the basis of the Scriptures”

427: “To its symbols the Lutheran Church… [confesses] precisely those doctrines revealed in Scripture.”

444: “The Lutheran Church, on the other hand, does not stand on an exposition of Scripture, but on Scripture itself.”

463: “Luther's powerful words about the name "Jehovah" deserve to be read again and again. He writes …in his writing of the Shem Hamphoras…”

577: “It is unworthy of a Christian to reinterpret or allow oneself to reinterpret the Holy Scripture, which he has recognized as God's own Word, according to human opinions (hypotheses), including the so-called Copernican world system”

614-615: “The French Revolution at the end of the 18th century… is matched by recent events (the activities of the Communists and many Socialists of the deliberately untruthful statesmen and their accomplices, the newspaper editors during and after the World War [WWI]).”

627: “…the woman is forbidden to occupy a position of dominion over the man 1 Tim. 2:12”

————————————————

The 1950 CPH translation may be borrowed on 1-hour increments here for comparison and reference.

The following is a viewer of the latest PDF file (as of 2023-10-31):

The latest DOCX file, English version is HERE (10-31-2023), without highlighting HERE (10-31-2023); German version here (10-31-2023). The PDF uploaded to the Internet Archive may be viewed here.

Soon to follow will be the final volume 3… in the next post in this series.

Preuss9b: Untrue, sneering outbursts of "Lutherans"—Walther's lesson on love vs. doctrine

      This concludes from Part 9a (Table of Contents in Part 1) a series presenting C. F. W. Walther's account of Dr. Eduard Preuss's apostasy to the Roman Catholic Church. — Finally, Walther makes his final reference to the Preuss affair as he had to defend against erring Lutherans in America. — Der Lutheraner, vol. 28 (March 1), p. 83-4: 

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

The Messenger of Peace [Friedensbote] of the local United [Church]. It was predictable that this issue of the Messenger of Peace would communicate the apostasy of Dr. Preuss to his readers with great pleasure. He did it according to his heart's desire, and of course faithfully used the given opportunity to throw a stone of suspicion at our synod and church. There is no doubt that the Pharisees at that time did not fail to suspect Christ and the entire apostolic college when Judas, whose “friends” and “protectors” they [Christ and the disciples] had been, became a traitor. The [page 84] Messenger of Peace also makes the remark: 

“The Lutheraner persistently kept silent about this somewhat mysterious story in his own house, although covering it with the cloak of love is not usually his habit, at least where ‘outsiders’ and ‘neighbors’ are concerned.” 

Here the Messenger of Peace seems to have forgotten that when a few years ago a leader [Hauptmann] was quietly removed from the United [Church] seminary for a serious crime, the Lutheraner covered this and other certain incidents there “with the cloak of love”. We would have remained silent about that even today, since we are of the opinion that apostasy and grave cases of sin of individuals prove nothing against the fellowship in which they occur, but only the false doctrine; 

however, this untrue, sneering outburst requires us to help the Messenger of Peace to better self-knowledge as much as possible through this remembrance. He may also consider that it is dangerous, if one lives in a glass house, to throw stones at others. — By the way, the Messenger of Peace also tries to suspect us Lutherans on this occasion by writing that Preuss was “immediately accepted by the Lutheran Missouri Synod with open arms and made professor at their theological seminary in St. Louis and especially highly honored because of his firmness and correctness in ‘pure doctrine’”. The Messenger of Peace knows quite well, however, that we Lutherans did not want to accept Preuss and were only persuaded to accept and employ Preuss not “immediately,” as the Messenger of Peace says untruly, but only after almost a year of probation. — The Messenger of Peace also finally informs its readers of the fable that Preuss was “already the second professor *) of the same theological institution” who had taken refuge in the Roman church; while the Messenger of Peace knows quite well that Baumstark was not a theological professor, but only a teacher at the practical pre-school, in which he only had to teach reading, writing, arithmetic, mensa declension and amo conjugation [i.e. Latin grammar] and the like. Or is such a teacher already considered a theological professor by the Lord? — May the Messenger of Peace, who always talks so much about love, learn on this occasion that to love does not mean to talk much about love, but to practice love. W. [Walther]

————————

*) These words were printed by the Messenger of Peace itself in a blocked font, “without considering” that also in the United seminary a second one followed this fallen one, without us having mentioned one or the other in our publications.

- - - - - - - - - -  End of series  - - - - - - - - - - -

      In my research of Old Missouri Synod periodicals, I found no other reference to the Preuss affair.  But this case afforded C. F. W. Walther one of his greatest teaching lessons for his Lutheran readers.  May it spiritually benefit readers of this blog today as it has for me!  Amen!

Preuss9a: Reply refuted; lambs and wolves: Jesuits

      This continues from Part 8 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting C. F. W. Walther's account of Dr. Eduard Preuss's apostasy to the Roman Catholic Church. — Two weeks after Walther's exposé of the Preuss affair, the defector made an attempt at a "correction". — Der Lutheraner, vol. 28 (March 1), p. 83: 

Church Chronicle.

Walther             —            Preuss

Dr. [Eduard] Preuss, in the Herald of Faith [Catholic Herold des Glaubens] of Feb. 25, under the title “Correction”, tried to blur the impression which the revelations made about him in Der Lutheraner [of Feb. 15], which were based on facts, must have created.  We consider it all the less worth the trouble to prove in detail that the alleged “Correction” is a web of truth and lies,*) since only an incompetent reader would not already find out from the “Correction” itself how absurd, yes, partly how ridiculous the poor man tries to talk his way out of it.**)  

——————

*) It is an obvious lie, for example, that Preuss did not plan that “contract” in secret, did not fearfully keep it secret as long as it was possible, but made it known to us or a colleague; it is also an obvious lie that he had already written the part of the article in Lehre und Wehre from which we made excerpts, already in September.  

**) It is ridiculous, for example, that Preuss tries to whitewash himself by saying that he wrote about the Pope in much earlier times, which of course he did not have printed until December 1871!

In any case, the cleverest thing in the article is the mild tone that is slipped into it.  Informed people know, however, that such a tone is also one of the means that the Jesuits sometimes believe they must use.  After all, the third general of the Jesuits, Francis Borgia, himself declared of the Jesuits: 

“Like lambs we have entered, 

Like wolves we will rule, 

Like dogs we will be driven out, 

Like eagles we will renew ourselves”.  W. [Walther]

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

      In the next news item following the above, Walther had to defend against even more opposition, this time from American Lutherans, in the concluding Part 9b.

Preuss8: great shame for Missourians… or honor? Ziegler overlooks facts

      This continues from Part 7 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting C. F. W. Walther's account of Dr. Eduard Preuss's apostasy to the Roman Catholic Church. — Walther now concludes his account of this sad, confusing matter, and turns Preuss's defection into an honor for the Missourians. 

      Walther gives an account of another Missouri teacher who left Lutheranism for Catholicism, H. M. Baumstark. Some information on him was provided by Arthur Drevlow in his 1972 dissertation A History Of Concordia Theological Seminary Of Springfield, Illinois, p. 52-53:

“In 1865 H. Baumstark was called to teach in the pro-seminary. However, he remained with the faculty for only a short period of service which ended in a bizarre way with his joining the Roman Catholic church in 1869.”

Walther fills in the full story on Baumstark below. — From Der Lutheraner, vol. 28 (Feb. 15), pp. 75. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - -    An Apostasy.    - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[by C. F. W. Walther; Part 8]

We can see in this nothing but a deep horrible apostasy from God and His truth against better knowledge and conscience. See 2 Thess. 2:8-12. 

But isn't it a great shame for us Missourians that one of those under us leaves us again and becomes a papist? 9) We answer: Nothing less than this: rather it does us great honor; for from this everyone can see that hypocrites and swindlers can also get lost into our fellowship, as a Judas himself had gotten among the apostles, but that such spirits cannot dwell among us. With such spirits none of the lower ones leaves us, but strangers who for the sake of earthly advantage had lost their way among us. As John writes of his time: “They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us”. 1 John 2:19. We in no way envy the Jesuits such men as Preuss, for he is made for them. As we have seen, what had long since been agreed inwardly, is now also agreed outwardly. — 

————————

9) The Papists glory in that this is already the second “professor of theology” we have lost to them. That is a vain glory. [H.M.] Baumstark was not a professor of theology, but only had to teach in the pre-seminary of the practical institution good-reading, spelling, the beginning of geography and Latin grammar etc.; but because he had to have a name for which one could call him, he was called “professor” according to the custom of the country. Of course, we Lutherans are pleased that Mr. Baumstark is so highly impressed by our dignity distribution that even after a fall he keeps his honor together.

————————

You ask dear reader whether we regret having accepted and trusted the unfortunate Preuss for as long as we could? We answer: No, we don't regret it. That is the way of Christians, that they can easily let their love be deceived, but never their faith. It is true, distrustful, suspicious minds usually are right in experience because people are so evil; but the distrustful are therefore not right because love, as long as it can, believes the best of its neighbor. We have <column 3> therefore only one wish: that God, whose door of grace always remains open in this life, may take pity on the fallen and, if not sooner, but in the hour of death, withdraw him from the idol which he now worships and calls Mary, and draw him back to himself and still save him as a branding iron from a fire, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our mediator, to whom be praise and honor in time and eternity. Amen. W. [Walther]

- - - - - - - - - -  End of essay  - - - - - - - - - - -

     Prof. Roland Ziegler stated in his essay (p. 291) that “The only source for Preuss's reasons for defecting to Rome is the account he published seven years later.” It may be noted that he does not follow the advice of Prof. Ludwig Fuerbringer, but rather ignores Walther's report of the facts in the above article that exposes Preuss's real reasons. He assumes that Walther's account is suspect because it would be biased, so Ziegler prefers the reporting of history by the method of so-called "wie es eigentlich gewesen ist" ("as it actually was").  Perhaps Prof. Ziegler wanted testimony from more of the people involved, such as the editor of the Abendschule newspaper, or other members of the faculty.  But Walther had no interest in defending his own person, or dragging other people into his report. He knew they would support his report if called upon.

      I have spent much time translating and polishing this essay because of its church history and especially because it rightly distinguishes between truth and error, between truth and lies. It took me some time to decide whether to publish it because it can be somewhat difficult to understand in places, such was the convoluted world of Dr. Preuss. — May Prof. Ziegler's final words be heeded (p. 308):

The tragic apostasy of Preuss is a warning to all of us: "Therefore, let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall" (1 Cor 10:12).

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

      There is a postscript to this story: Walther's answer to Dr. Preuss's response, and to attacks from opposing Lutherans… in the next Part 9a

Preuss7: Truth easy to prove, error requires art, great art

      This continues from Part 6 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting C. F. W. Walther's account of Dr. Eduard Preuss's apostasy to the Roman Catholic Church. — Walther first exposes the contradictions in a devious papal bishop, then how other prominent Lutherans who condemned Preuss were mistaken on why he left. Walther uses this extraordinary case to instruct his readers. — From Der Lutheraner, vol. 28 (Feb. 15), pp. 75. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - -    An Apostasy.    - - - - - - - - - - - - -

[by C. F. W. Walther; Part 7]

By the way, it is assumed that the misapprehension of Preuss's Lutheran doctrine of justification would have had a part in Preuss's decision to resign, 7) but then it cannot be explained at all that Preuss had articles printed on the first of December 1871 in which he, with great zeal, declares the pure Lutheran doctrine of justification for the supreme article, to which all other doctrines would have to be addressed. And in these he does not only oppose a chief doctrine of the Papal Church, purgatory [Mittelort], but also declared the Pope to be the “Antichrist” and “Firstborn of Satan” and confirmed this historically, — and that in the same month he had approached a papist bishop (who in addition to having only recently declared the infallibility of the Pope, which he confessed with his mouth, yet in a public council with the same mouth declared this ridiculous) “for the resolution of some doubts, as well as (at the same time!) for instruction in the Catholic religion” and already in the next month had himself <column 2> rebaptized and received into the papal bosom, in order now to defend all abominations of the same with the same zeal with which he previously defended the evangelical truth recognized by him, but now to fight this truth with the same zeal with which he formerly fought the abominations of the papacy known exactly by him! 8) 

————————

7) Already in the spring of last year [1871], when in the Lutheran Church Friend the most horrible accusations had appeared as coming from the mouths of Professors Tholuck and [Julius] Köstlin against Preuss, he wanted to resign himself, to edit the Abendschule and in addition to hold only a few more hours in the seminary free of charge, but with the explanation that this was only in order not to tarnish the Synod with a disgrace, not because of doubts about the doctrine, but rather because he never let any of it be noticed. When the supervisory authority and all the presidents voted to hold this in abeyance until Tholuck and Köstlin had confessed to what they had allegedly said, he [Preuss] therefore remained until the materialization of a clause of a contract, which he had deliberately kept secret, came to light. Through this he had sought to seize the appointment of a synod publication, but now he saw with horror every foothold in our fellowship disappear under his feet, his face displaying this in that hour.

8) Now Preuss can show even more his gift of presenting evidences. To prove the truth is an easy thing, but to prove the error, namely to prove it seemingly and plausibly, requires art, great art. Thus, for example, in the constitution of the wicked Jesuit mob, [Jesuit gang] is written: “That no determination, explanation, or orders of any kind to live to a commitment can lead to a mortal sin or a venial [forgivable] sin: except when the superior commanded it in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, or in the power of obedience. (See the Constitution of the Jesuits, according to the Prague edition, which they themselves provided: Institutum societatis Jesu autoritate congregationis generalis XVIII recusum. Pragae 1757. Vol. I, fol. 415.)  The Jesuits themselves refer to this passage in the index of this edition under the title: “Obedientia et obedire” as the determination of their principle: “The superiors can make it binding to sin in the power of obedience, if this brings many benefits”. — Now Preuss has a wonderful opportunity to show his art, namely to prove that this wicked diabolical Jesuit principle, which everyone must swear by when he conjures up the Constitution of the Jesuits, is a good divine Christian principle. For this he will be worthy of merit in this world by the Pope and a Jesuit and once in that world by the devil and his angels, if he does not truly repent before his death. 

- - - - - - - - - -  Concluded in Part 8  - - - - - - - - - - -

Walther addressed the most vexing part of his apostasy — how could Dr. Preuss have been so wrong even while he seemed so orthodox?  There is no theologian better than C. F. W. Walther to explain this. Prof. Fuerbringer's admission proves this. — In the next Part 8…