Search This Blog

Saturday, March 23, 2024

RH4: Hoffmann’s history from Köstering's book; Constitution and congregations

   This continues from Part 3 (Table of Contents in Part 1) in a series presenting Pastor's Hochstetter's critique of an 1881 German pamphlet on the Old Missouri Synod. — While many theologians in Germany mostly ignored the Missouri Synod, or gave small remarks against it, we find that Pastor Hoffmann was mostly well read in Missouri's writings, and gave surprising praise for them.  I call this portion a part of his "Yes" sections. But it does not last long. — The source of his history, Koestering's book on the Saxon emigration, has been conveniently translated and published in 2022 by the Concordia Historical Institute and CPH. — From Lehre und Wehre, vol. 28 (Jan. 1882), pp. 8-9 [EN]: 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

How the Missouri Synod is Judged in Germany Today.

[A review of an 1881 pamphlet by Pastor Rudolph Hoffmann of Germany]

By Pastor Ch. Hochstetter, Stonebridge, Canada.

The Emigration of the Saxon Lutherans in the Year 1838 and Their Settlement in Perry County, Missouri (CPH 2022)

It is to be expected that the first part, which describes the “origin and development of Missouri up to the present”, was more thorough and unprejudiced than the following part. Hoffmann [R. H.] followed Köstering's book [CHI/CPH 2022] about the emigration of the Saxon pastors. In just a few, marked features, M. [Martin] Stephan from Dresden is described as a man of eminent gifts and wonderful power over the hearts of men, who gathered many souls awakened by him around himself. In 1837 he declared that the hour had come to shake the dust off the feet of the people in Germany and emigrate to America. Although his followers there sought ecclesiastical freedom, they had nevertheless fallen into physical and spiritual misery under Stephan's rule, who not only taught that the preaching office was a means of grace, but had also conspired to act as bishop in the new settlement. — Under his orders, everything seemed to rush towards inevitable ruin. [p. 8:] 

“But then God saw His hour to expose the great hypocrite. The young pastor Carl Ferd. Wilh. Walther traveled to Perry County, the evidence for Stephan's conviction in hand.… They now felt that they had done wrong to put their trust in one man; one thought one was no longer a Christian congregation at all, but a congregational crowd, one was lost in time and eternity. … At his brother-in-law's, who had an excellent library, he (Walther) had delved into the writings of the fathers (especially into Luther's writings), and … Stephan's mistakes were soon recognized. In a public disputation, Walther victoriously argued 1) that the congregation [Gemeinde], though afflicted with many sins, was nonetheless a Christian church, 2) that despite all aberrations, Christ was still among them with his means of grace, 3) that the congregation had the full right to call preachers. Article VII of the Augsburg Confession served as a basis for this: The true church is an invisible one, the totality of all believers, this church and not a single state has received all rights and promises from the Lord. — Walther's theses had resounding success, the spell was broken, the inner distress was lifted, and gradually the outer distress gave way. A gradual blossoming began…”

Hoffmann further reports the emergence of the theological seminary, which was first founded by Pastor Löber in Altenburg, moved to St. Louis in 1849, and then raises the question: How did the Missouri Synod come about? The answer is that the foundation of Der Lutheraner, a popular church newspaper, which, although often vilified from the beginning, nevertheless acquired a considerable readership, had contributed much to it; in 1847 <page 9> the first synodical meetings took place in Chicago, in which they united to draft a constitution. The five demands which are a condition for joining the Synod are then listed by name: First the profession of the Holy Scripture, then the acceptance of all the symbolic books of the Lutheran Church, thirdly the renunciation of all church unionism and syncretism. — 

freedom of the congregation is very limited

Hoffmann thinks that although the Missouri Synod is only a basic [beruhender] body in relation to the individual congregations, the freedom of the congregation is in turn very limited by the confessional determination, for if a congregation does not agree with the doctrine of the Synod, it is excluded from the synodical association. Meanwhile it must be noted here: It goes without saying that the same thing that is a condition for membership must also be a condition for remaining in the synodical association. The Missourians also know how to distinguish between error and heresy; every Christian can be challenged by the latter [heresy], and it is unreasonable that Hoffmann, on p. 11 of his writing, instead of emphasizing the unity in all fundamental articles of faith, which the Missourians recognize as sufficient especially for “private Christians”, writes of an agreement to all “doctrinal points” as a conditio sine qua non. [indispensable and essential condition]. — 

- - - - - - - - - - -  Continued in Part 5  - - - - - - - - - - - -

      Hochstetter begins to call out where Hoffmann is coming from, for while he seems to say "Yes" to Missouri, he actually is heading the other way, i.e. he is going to say "No!". — In the next Part 5, Hochstetter elaborates on his defense

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments only accepted when directly related to the post.