Sacraments: Secondary to Word of Gospel; Piepkorn vs Pieper

[2024-11-30: see also this blog post on this subject]

    What is the primary fundamental article of Christianity? "The Word in the form of the Gospel". — 

      Philip James Secker († 2024) is perhaps the best known spokesman today for Prof. Arthur Carl Piepkorn († 1973).  His essay delivered to the The 32nd Annual Symposium on the Lutheran Confessions, at Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne, Indiana in January, 2009 may be downloaded here. It is entitled "Arthur Carl Piepkorn and The Schism of Authority in Lutheranism". The target of this essay is the teaching of Prof. Franz Pieper, this in spite of Pres. Harrison's claim that Pieper is "our greatest LCMS theologian". (Also in spite of Dr. Henry Allen's claim that "Pieper’s multi-volume Christian Dogmatics… remains a foundational text in LCMS seminary instruction".) As background for this matter, the following is from Pieper's Christian Dogmatics, vol. 1, p. 86: 

Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, important as they are, do not have the same importance and necessity as basis of faith as the Word in the form of the Gospel and are therefore called secondary fundamental articles.  

But Secker reports the following in his history of Prof. Arthur Carl Piepkorn, p. 12:

While reading the Symbols in the fall of 1928 and after, Piepkorn became convinced that according to them the Word and Sacraments are both constitutive of the Church. In 1937 he wrote that “Christianity is in its historic aspect essentially sacramental.”

Piepkorn testified to this [p. 6]:

I went up to the University with a habitual faith, but I found myself, very shortly, ill-equipped to meet either the problem of personal religion—I learned this in a personal religion group—or confrontation with other Christians. 

If Piepkorn had taken to heart the teaching of his "revered professor" Franz Pieper (p. 7), he would have had all that he needed to fend off those of the sects at the "University", for all he had to do to distinguish himself was tell them the true Gospel, i.e. Universal, Objective Justification.  But he did not... why?  Why would he shrug off the greatest teaching the world has, or ever will, hear, the teaching that distinguishes Christianity from all other religions?  Why would he either forget or leave this "Lutheran Doctrine of Justification" to fend for himself and claim that he "discovered" the Lutheran Confessions?

      As an antidote to the false teachings of both Profs. Piepkorn and David Scaer, I want to publish the full text and Christian teaching of Prof. Pieper from page 86 of Volume I [Christliche Dogmatik p. 95-96]:

In the controversies between the Lutheran and the Reformed Church, one of the disputed questions was whether Baptism and the Lord’s Supper belong to the foundation of the Christian faith.118 Scripture has decided this question. Baptism and the Lord’s Supper certainly do belong to the foundation of the Christian faith, together with the Word of the Gospel, for Baptism is given “for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38), and in the Lord’s Supper Christ’s body and blood are imparted as “given for you” and “shed for you for the remission of sins” (Luke 22:19 ff.; Matt. 26:26 ff.). The promise and offer of the forgiveness of sins, which is the foundation of faith, is contained also in the Sacraments.119 Hence the doctrines of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper are certainly fundamental doctrines. — But why do we call them articuli fundamentales secundarii? A man may, through ignorance of the nature and benefit of the Sacraments, lack that foundation of his faith which the Sacraments supply, but still have the true faith in the forgiveness of sins if he trusts in the Word of the Gospel, as heard or read. The reason is that the Gospel Word gives the full remission of sins gained by Christ, and Baptism and the Lord’s Supper give the same grace only in another and in a particularly consoling way (verbum visibile — applicatio individualis). The Christian who does not make the right use of the Sacraments, but trusts in the Gospel, has the true saving faith though he lacks the additional support for his faith which God has provided in the Sacraments.120 Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, important as they are, do not have the same importance and necessity as basis of faith as the Word in the form of the Gospel and are therefore appropriately called secondary fundamental articles. The one is essential to faith, the other is intended to support faith. What is absolutely necessary is the hearing of the Word. The articuli fundamentales secundarii are, in the words of Quenstedt, those qui non simpliciter fundamentales seu causa salutis sunt, ad fundamentum tamen pertinent (Systema I, 355).

—————————

118. Nikolaus Hunnius’ Διάσκεψις Theologica de Fundamentali Dissensu (1626) and Joh. Huelsemann’s Calvinismus Irreconciliabüis (1646). Walch, Bibliotheca Theologica, II, 486 ff., discusses the complete bibliography, covering also the Reformed writings.
119. This is fully discussed in the section "Baptism a True Means of Grace,” in Vol. III.
120. This is the case with the children of God in the Reformed bodies, who, misled by their teachers, fail to use Baptism and the Lord’s Supper as divinely appointed means of justification. Believing the Gospel, they have the full forgiveness of their sins, full salvation. Both Luther (St. L. XVII: 2212) and the Preface to the Book of Concord (Trigl. 19 f.) call attention to this.

      Why would Piepkorn call Franz Pieper his "revered professor" when he expressly contradicts a major teaching of his?  Prof. David Scaer is in the same camp against Pieper, even when he seemingly praised him.  And make no mistake, they considered/consider themselves to be "Confessional Lutherans!"  Scaer even authored a book on "Confessional Lutheranism".  Yes indeed! they are to be considered CONFESSIONAL in capital letters, Pieper is out with his transient opinion.  And Piepkorn was one of the translators for Tappert's Book of Concord... doesn't that make him truly "Confessional"?

      Are we to listen to Piepkorn and Scaer when they proclaim that they hold to Confessional Theology more than Franz Pieper does?  Are we to distrust Pieper?

      Yet it was this very teaching of Franz Pieper, in his Christian Dogmatics, that jolted me back to my Christian faith, that caused me to not consider Holy Communion as a work of mine, but God's work.  It is Pieper's clear distinction of the Holy Scripture from the Sacraments that caused me to truly value them, not devalue them as Piepkorn and Scaer imply.  For the basis of the Sacraments is not their ex opere operato (the work itself), but the Word that gives them their divine power, that indeed they are God's work.  It was not today's LC-MS sacramental teaching that brought me back to my Christian faith, it was the old (German) Missouri's teaching on the Word of God, the true Word of the Gospel, i.e. Universal, Objective Justification – the teaching that is largely missing from Profs. Arthur Carl Piepkorn and David Scaer.

My gravestone is set, also my life verse

      I have recently made my funeral arrangements and pre-paid them. I also had a monument company prepare my gravestone. Unfortunately I was not able to use the gravesite that my father had pre-purchased several decades ago because a nearby tree had grown up so large that it blocked that plot of ground. So that gravesite had to be swapped for an open site about 50 feet south of my father's and mother's gravestones. 

      But the point of publicizing this gravestone is to highlight the Bible verse that I will take to my grave. It was the verse that I recall the old Missouri Synod Lutheran fathers used to prove that Justification was not for the few, but for all, everyone from the beginning of time until the end. It was the verse that no one could take away from me, even though I had turned away from God after having been instructed by a faithful LC-MS pastor in my youth. But when circumstances came about that caused me to retrace my path back to my upbringing, Walther and Pieper hammered home the fact that God was already reconciled to all, including me who had turned away from Him. I was translated into heaven. And I clung for dear life to a Bible verse that no one could take away from me: 

2 Corinthians 5:19

To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, 

not imputing their trespasses unto them; 

and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.

I am happy to now be permitted to set a reference to this verse in stone, my gravestone:

It is a simple message. May readers take it to heart, and to their grave.

Two quotes: MacKenzie and J. Fiene on LC–MS, Kolb

      In my readings I have recently come across not one but two writers in the LC–MS who have pointed out difficulties within their Synod:

Prof. Cameron MacKenzie on the LC–MS:

      Although I have pointed out some weaknesses of Prof. MacKenzie, yet he made a striking statement in his essay "The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod and the Public Square in the Era of C. F. W. Walther", published in the 2004 CPH compendium The Anonymous God, p.93-94:

“The synodical forefathers [i.e. old Missouri] expressed their convictions as the clear teachings of the permanent and unchanging Word of God. In so doing, they imposed a theological imprint upon the LCMS that continues to shape the thinking and behavior of many in the Synod today, but not everyone, as many believe that new situations require new answers. Nevertheless, because the synodical founders articulated their positions on the basis of the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions, it may be possible to discern the outline of an answer to the Synod's problems today in their writings if [!] the LCMS maintains the same commitments as its founding generation.

Note that Prof. MacKenzie used, and italicized, the word "if", as if to doubly emphasize his earlier point that "not everyone" in the LC–MS has their theology shaped by the forefathers. But his conditional statement seems to suggest that he even thinks the "same commitment" to the "Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions" is already not being held now. No better example of one who does not follow the "theological imprint" of the "synodical forefathers" is Dr. Robert Kolb who has never truly honored the forefathers, and even crassly questioned Walther's explanations of the Formula of Concord. While MacKenzie does not explicitly call out Dr. Kolb, our next worthy writer does.

 

Rev. Dr. John Fiene against Dr. Robert Kolb:

      Dr. Fiene had been a pastor of a notable congregation here in Indiana, in Zionsville, Advent Evangelical Lutheran Church. According to KFUO in 2022, he was then "pastor at University Lutheran Chapel on the University of Colorado campus in Boulder", but is no longer today, presumably retired. 

      Admittedly this quote is from 1987, yet it is still significant for its rarity within the LC–MS, that any pastor would criticize Prof. Robert Kolb. Fiene did exactly that in his 1987 book review of Kolb's 1984 CPH Speaking the Gospel Today: A Theology for Evangelism. From CTQ 51 (1987), #2-3, p. 194:

“…much of the book is… weighted down with pious phrases and theological rhetoric. It is, moreover, disconcerting that Kolb speaks of the redemptive work of Christ as though it were a “means” to restoring us to the prefall Adamic state. He writes: ‘Furthermore, faith does experience the joy and peace which comes from realizing that God loves us, died for us and rose for us, so that He might give us new life, the life which He designed for us in Eden’ (p. 168). The book is filled with references to a nondescript ‘image of God.’ ‘Only when faith rests secure in Jesus’ hand can we truly function as God designed us to function, as the image of God which pours out its love, care and concern’ (p. 193). The impression given by words like ‘obedience’ and ‘God’s design’ could result in a Reformed notion of discipleship taking precedence over calling, or sanctification over justification. ‘Instead of a heavenly goal, the goal of Jesus’ design for Christian witness is discipleship’ (p. 152). To put the best construction upon such phraseology, faith without the additional context of the Christian as God’s workmanship is like an idea without an object. Yet the greatest problem we face in witnessing is a failure to comfort Christians with the knowledge that, unlike Adam who could proclaim God’s glory without sin, we always proclaim it despite our sin and at the foot of the naked tree, not as the naked man. The rub is not in the call to fulfill God’s ‘plan’ or design, but rather in the nature of that design. The design of God is experienced only in the continual justification of the sinner before God. In reality, the First Article, after the fall, now serves as an introduction to the Second. The idea that we experience the fulfilment of our design in terms of the First Article always leads to a theology of glory and not a theology of hope.”

I was amazed to read these very sharp critical remarks against Dr. Kolb's writing! I doubt that any theologian or pastor in the LC–MS has published anything like these serious criticisms. The points Dr. Fiene raises strike at not just Kolb's Reformed leaning, but his failing to properly distinguish Law and Gospel! I was reminded of another LC–MS theologian who wrote like Kolb, Dr. Scott Keith, Concordia–Irvine. — Kolb's 1995 second edition took no notice of Fiene's criticisms, making no changes to the wording of the quoted passages above. This type of theology has permeated Kolb's works since 1984. Lord, have mercy!

Limits6d: “pretense of modern science”; whither Luther Classical College?

      This concludes from Limits 6c, a 4-part appendix to the original series (Table of Contents in Part 1). — Again, as he did with Concordia–Milwaukee, Pieper highlights the limits for higher education, and why there must be these limits for a truly Christian institution. — From Der Lutheraner 65 (1909, pp. 386-387 DE [EN]:

Diverse knowledge and unique knowledge.

Address delivered at the dedication of Concordia College at 

Bronxville, N. Y., by F. Pieper. (conclusion)

But we know what they are talking about. We know that their speeches, under the pretense of modern science, lead mankind back to the time of ignorance, to the time when people did not know Christ and his sacrifice for the sin of the world, but tried in vain to reconcile God with their own works and sacrifices. These people therefore also have a completely wrong world view. They truly do not know what the world still stands for. They think that the world is still there for human genius to unfold and have an effect, for the English spirit, the German spirit, the French spirit, the Japanese spirit, but especially the American spirit to show what it is capable of. That is a completely erroneous view of the world. This is talk that belongs to the age of ignorance, but not to the twentieth century. The world is not for the purpose of people showing what they are capable of, but the world is for the purpose of people repenting and believing in Christ. As the apostle Paul testifies to the Athenians that God now commands all men to repent and that everyone should believe in Christ, and as Christ himself declares: “The gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come” (Matthew 24:14). 

The correct worldview is therefore this: The world and all that is in the world exists only for the sake of the gospel. The world is waiting for people to repent and believe in the gospel of Christ. For the sake of the gospel, God still gives life and breath to everyone, everywhere. States still exist for the sake of the gospel: England, Germany, France, Japan, even the United States of North America. For the sake of the gospel, the sun, moon and stars still shine. For the sake of the gospel, God still gives seed and harvest and earthly goods. For the sake of the gospel, God still gives understanding and wisdom and institutions of learning. The things of the world have value in the last analysis only in that they serve the gospel of Christ. In the light of the right worldview, even educational institutions only have as much value as they directly or indirectly serve the Gospel.

This alone also gives — let us never forget it! — the value of our Concordia of Bronxville. All knowledge and all training of the spirit that is imparted here is intended to serve the Gospel directly or indirectly. Hebrew, Greek, Latin, German, English — these five languages will be taught and learned here for the service of the Gospel. O glorious Concordia! You will be a jewel in the eyes of God if you remain faithful to your destiny. Your walls will not remain forever, but will decay or sink back to nothing on the Last Day. But your fruit will remain if you have served the Gospel. Therefore all who love Christ and His Gospel should love you, Concordia of Bronxville, pray for you, care for you, give you abundantly of their earthly goods and finally receive their eternal reward of grace for the sake of Jesus Christ our Savior. Amen.

- - - - - - - - - - -  End of address  - - - - - - - - - - -

      What a sobering situation… Concordia–Bronxville is now gone, like several other Concordias, including Portland and Alabama. Some may attribute their demise to the changing situation, changing demographics, financial strain, etc. But with the reports of how far the teaching changed with respect to the Gospel and the Word, how can one avoid Pieper’s words above which also contained a warning, “You will be a jewel in the eyes of God if you remain faithful to your destiny”. One notices that all the "Notable alumni" who were theologians were also "Walkout" sympathizers. Did they “remain faithful”?  Far from it. — One wonders what "Notable alumni" will come out of the new Luther Classical College. May they take note of Pieper's counsel! 

     In the December 2023 issue of Ad Fontes, a monthly publication of Luther Classical College, Dr. Christian Preus stated that "the measure of our success is faithfulness to God’s Word", and that "We seek to hand this faithfulness down to the next generation." While many consider that his leadership will be enough to get this institution properly focused on the right doctrine, yet a problem exists for Dr. Preus in that he is in fellowship with LC–MS leaders and teachers whose teaching has been demonstrated to be lacking "faithfulness to God's Word", and even to the Lutheran Confessions. How does he think that he can maintain the proper focus where the Concordias of Bronxville, Portland, Alabama, Texas, also Valparaiso University have gone? Will he remain faithful to God's Word and avoid expediencies that cut corners? May God help him!

Limits6c: “What good is all knowledge if…”

      This continues from Limits 6b, a 4-part appendix to the original series (Table of Contents in Part 1). — Pieper contrasts the two knowledges, human knowledge and saving knowledge. In matters of saving knowledge, it does not matter whether one is "a man of culture or a barbarian". From Der Lutheraner 65 (1909), pp. 386-387 DE:

Diverse knowledge and unique knowledge.

Address delivered at the dedication of Concordia College at 

Bronxville, N. Y., by F. Pieper. (continued)

They [Athenians] do not know two things, because it is neither written in the heart of man by nature nor can it be read in the book of nature. First, <page 387> they do not know that the Son of God became man and that this incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ, is the Savior of men, namely, that he died for men to redeem their sins, and that God now wants all men to repent and believe in Christ as their Savior.  Secondly, they do not know that Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, rose again from the dead and is the judge of men. This world is coming to an end. At the end of the world, Jesus Christ will appear. He who has believed in Him will be given eternal life; he who has not believed in Him will not see life, but the wrath of God will remain upon him, regardless of whether he was a skillful Athenian or a clumsy Boeotian, Greek or Roman, a man of culture or a barbarian. The reason why the apostle calls the Athenians ignorant, despite the worldly knowledge they may have had before others, is thus perfectly clear.

We humans, dear listeners, are ignorant as long as we do not know the Savior of the world and the Judge of the world. What good is all historical knowledge if we do not know the main fact of human history, namely that Jesus Christ came into the world to save mankind? What good is all linguistic knowledge, even if it extends to seven or more languages, if we cannot hear through the languages and spread further that in which alone lies the salvation of men from the dies irae, dies ille, [the day of wrath, that day], from the wrath of the Last Day? What good is all our knowledge of nature, of God's creatures, if our — the discerning man’s — relationship to our Creator is not in order, if we do not know how we can have a merciful Creator? What good is the knowledge that there is a God, and what good is our civil righteousness, our righteousness before men, if we do not have the righteousness that is valid before God through faith in Christ and do not know: “Christ's blood and righteousness, that is my adornment and robe of honor; with it I will stand before God when I enter heaven”? [TLH 371] “Knowledge is power.” Yes, it is! But only one knowledge overcomes death and judgment, the knowledge of Christ, repentance and faith in Him. “Knowledge is useful.” Yes, it is! But the knowledge of Christ is the only knowledge that has the promise not only of this life, but also of the life to come.

Let us now return to our institution. In our Concordia in Bronxville we will cultivate worldly knowledge with all diligence, that is, the knowledge that also serves this earthly life. Our aim will be not only to equal other institutions of the same kind in this, but to surpass them. But in doing so we will not forget the knowledge “κατ εξοχήν”, the unique knowledge, the knowledge of Christ as the only Savior of the world and the great future judge of the world, but let it remain the great main thing. We will not allow ourselves to be misled by boastful talk of “modern science”. It has been said in recent times — especially here in the eastern United States — that “modern science” demands that people no longer repent and believe in Christ, but rather cast aside the gospel of Christ, the crucified and risen One, as outdated and think of a new religion. These people do not know what they are talking about. Sometimes they repeat words they do not understand, sometimes they have unclear concepts of their own which they do not account for. 

- - - - - - - - - - -  Concluded in Limits 6d  - - - - - - - - - - -

      Pieper now applies it to his listeners in New York, that they are to also promote the "unique knowledge", the Christian Gospel. — In the concluding Limits6d…

Limits6b: Athenians: the “progressives”, the “ignoramuses”; Paul's address

      This continues from Limits 6a, a 4-part appendix to the original series (Table of Contents in Part 1). — Pieper now tells his listeners to follow him to the "metropolis of learning", Athens of antiquity. And his description makes one wonder if he takes us not to antiquity, but to today's "metropolises of learning". This was the environment that the Apostle Paul faced in Athens. From Der Lutheraner 65 (1909, pp. 386-387 DE:

 

Diverse knowledge and unique knowledge.

Address delivered at the dedication of Concordia College at 

Bronxville, N. Y., by F. Pieper. (continued)

But there is another kind of knowledge against which all the above-mentioned knowledge is out of the question, a knowledge so important and so decisive for the whole of mankind and for every single member of mankind that all men who do not possess it have an entirely false view of the world and are to be called ignoramuses. Follow me to the metropolis of knowledge in so-called classical antiquity, to the city of Athens.

An apostle of Jesus Christ, the apostle Paul, also came to Athens on his first trip to Europe, as we are told in the 17th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. The city of Athens was, as the Roman Cicero admits, the metropolis of intelligence. Human knowledge had plenty of representatives in the city. Socrates had taught here. Plato, Socrates' even more famous pupil, had founded his philosophical school here, the so-called Academy. A little later, Aristotle, who some have declared to be the greatest sage of the world, also taught here in the Lyceum. Worldly wisdom was also represented in several schools here in Athens at the time when the apostle Paul came to Athens. The apostle of Christ soon came into disputation with the Epicureans and Stoics. The Athenians were all, as we would say today, very “progressive”. They always wanted to hear the latest news, Acts 17:20-21. They also showed their keen intellectual interest when the apostle Paul appeared in their midst. 

They took the apostle by the hand (Acts 17:19) and led him to the place of judgment, the Areopagus, the place in the city where wise and prudent thoughts were exchanged. Here they challenged the apostle of Christ to speak, and the apostle spoke on the Areopagus. What does he have to say to the Athenians? The apostle's speech culminated in the words: “God has overlooked the time of ignorance; but now he commands all men everywhere to repent, because he has appointed a day on which he will judge the circle of the earth [Kreis des Erdbodens] with righteousness through one man, in whom he has decreed it, and hold up to all men the faith after he has raised him from the dead.” [Acts 17:30-31]

You can imagine the astonishment of the Athenians at the apostle's words. The apostle tells the educated, scientifically-minded Athenians that they have lived in a time of ignorance, that is, they have been ignorant until now. Why? Is he denying their worldly education and their worldly knowledge? Not at all. He even quotes from one of their poets the sentence: “We are of his race” as a testimony to the natural truth that there is a God and that human beings are God's creatures. And yet he calls them ignorant. Why then does the apostle call the Athenians ignorant? Why do the Athenians know nothing? 

- - - - - - - - - - -  Continued in Limits 6c  - - - - - - - - - - -

     Pieper's description of Athens makes one feel that they have actually been there. I had to read and study Acts 17:16 ff. again to fully appreciate this. In more recent times, at the time of the Reformation, Luther had to stand up to Erasmus, a very learned man, who was "ignorant" regarding the free will of man. It seems that the world today is ruled by "progressives".  (Although the outcome of the recent presidential election in America will put a dent in it.) Even the seminaries are being taken over by the "progressives". And so our response should be modeled after Paul's address. — In the next part Limits6c…

Limits6a: Pieper to Bronxville: "unique knowledge" – don’t forget it (1909)

      This is a 4-part appendix to a previous blog series (Table of Contents in Part 1; Part 5) on "The Limits of Human Science" in the Synod's educational institutions. The previous posts presented Prof. Franz Pieper's address to Concordia–Milwaukee in 1901, and also compared Pieper's counsel for Valparaiso University in 1926 with the plans for the new "Luther Classical College" to open in 2025 in Wyoming [Part 5]. In 1909, 8 years after his address at Milwaukee, Pieper delivered another important dedication address that is worthy of study. It echoes much of what he said in 1901, but with some added points, and Pieper is always edifying. It had to be a joyous occasion for Pieper since he had earlier, in 1886, corresponded with Pastor J. H. Sieker to encourage him in his efforts to get this school opened.

      Concordia–Bronxville closed in August, 2021, an institution far different from when it first began. In 1909 it had a Synod leader in Pieper who guided it on the right course. But Bronxville drifted off course, as it seems practically all Concordia schools have done. — Many Concordias have closed, making it all the more important that the new "Luther Classical College" in Wyoming get it right from the beginning and always stay focused on the right priorities. What better way than to study and take to heart Pieper's counsel!

      Pieper demonstrates his knowledge of ancient history, world history. His overview was quite informative and interesting for me. He even calls out certain aspects of the fields of astronomy and theoretical philosophy as harboring "illusory knowledge". But his review of Apostle Paul's visit to Athens is most instructive, for it puts human knowledge in perspective.

      The following dedicatory address was published in Der Lutheraner 65 (1909, pp. 386-387 DE EN]: 

 

Concordia-Bronxville, now closed

Diverse knowledge and unique knowledge.

Address delivered at the dedication of

Concordia College at Bronxville, N. Y., by F. Pieper.

Like other educational institutions, our Concordia in Bronxville, the first buildings of which we are opening for use today, is intended to serve knowledge. The human spirit is formed and destined by God to know, that is, to take cognizance of things and to have knowledge of them. Knowledge also has great practical significance for man. It has rightly been said that “knowledge is power” and “knowledge is useful”.

Now knowledge is of many kinds. Let me first say a few words to you about the knowledge that belongs in this life.

There is historical knowledge. From existing documents and, to some extent, from tradition, we can gain knowledge of what happened long before our time and what people who lived centuries and millennia before us said and did. And this historical knowledge is useful. We know how highly Luther valued historical knowledge. He calls history the most excellent earthly teacher. He calls the “writers of history” the “most useful people” and their books “wonderfully useful for recognizing and governing the course of the world, indeed for seeing God's wonders and work”. — 

There is also linguistic knowledge. We can acquire knowledge of old and new languages. And the benefits are obvious. The knowledge of modern languages enables us to have an extended intercourse with present-day humanity. It has been calculated that a knowledge of German and English alone enables us to communicate with the fourth part of the last living human race. Knowledge of the old languages is not useless either. Apart from the fact that elements of the old languages have passed into newer languages, namely English, the knowledge of old languages enables us to recognize what the civilized world thought and did centuries and millennia ago. In recent times, a movement has begun to push into the background the study of ancient languages, especially the so-called classical languages, Greek and Latin, in higher educational institutions. We will not go along with this movement in our secondary schools. — 

There is also a scientific knowledge. It arises from the observation of things and facts that exist in the vast and wonderful realm of nature. Admittedly, much in this field is passed off as real knowledge, which is only illusory knowledge, human imagination. I need only remind you of the field of astronomy and theoretical philosophy. But there still remains a sum of real knowledge in the field of nature that is of great benefit to human life here on earth. — 

Finally, there is also a body of knowledge that has been called moral knowledge. This is the knowledge of an all-powerful, holy God and of the difference between good and evil or of civil justice, which is inherent in all human beings. This knowledge is also extremely useful. Without external, civil justice, it would be impossible for people to live together in a state. 

That, in brief, is the human knowledge that belongs to this life. But there is another kind of knowledge against which all the above-mentioned knowledge is out of the question…

- - - - - - - - - - -  Continued in Limits 6b  - - - - - - - - - - -

      The leader of the movement to establish Luther Classical College, Dr. Christian Preus, has emphasized a "classical" education from the beginning, including languages. We see from the above that this agrees with Pieper's emphasis. But will he agree with Pieper's points on "scientific knowledge"? There are signs that he may not exactly. — In the next Limits 6b we are treated to a wonderful overview of antiquity…