Memories 9: great knowledge; humorous; Navy league, warships; Vatican ‘For Rent’?; Pelikan, Lueking, Danker false charges

      This continues from Part 8 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a series by Prof. Ludwig Fürbringer of his personal memories of the departed Franz Pieper in the 1931 Der Lutheraner magazine. — In this segment, more than others, we learn a little more of the man – his great general knowledge of the world, his interest in parks and warships, etc. Although short, it reveals more of his "personal" side.

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

(page 283, col. 1)

Memories of Dr. Franz Pieper.

by Ludwig Fürbringer – [3.] (Part 9 of 16)

But one should not come up with the idea as if Dr. Pieper would have been a man buried in his study, who otherwise would not have cared for the world and the church.  On the contrary, this versatile man

●  followed everything in the world and in the Church with interest,

●  applied everywhere the sound standard of Scripture and Confession,

●  knew about some things which one never would have expected him to speak of, and

●  understood how to speak of things so intelligently and interestingly,

that in this way he astonished and made a lasting impression upon distant, even very different, persons who once happened to meet with him.

Pieper and wife (?),
1926 new Seminary dedication video 0:13

He also often showed a humorous streak; but everything had a serious, biblical background. So it may come as a surprise to many that he was interested in warships and, at least in earlier years, knew pretty much about so many-inch guns. He probably even got the relevant publications from Washington and looked closely at the illustrations. There was another reason for that, of course; because, like anyone who works hard mentally, sometimes he feels the need to direct his mind to something completely different. For years he was part of the naval league of our country, without, of course, sharing their jingoism and militarism, because he was a peace-loving man. He was interested in the public parks in our city and in the zoological garden. And some walkers along the streets and street vendors could tell of his friendliness and assistance.

Looking back on the nearly thirty-eight years of working with him, I have so many memories that if I wanted to tell everything, I would have to unduly stretch these articles. But I still want to report some more about his life. L[udwig] F[ührbringer].

- - - - - - - - - - - -  continued in Part 10  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

      "Old Missouri" is characterized as uninformed on various matters regarding the world and the Church.  Prof. Jaroslav Pelikan charged the American Lutherans (i.e. the Missourians) in 1952 with ignoring German church events.  In a similar way, Dr. F. Dean Lueking in 1964, charged an Old Missouri missionary with lacking an "elementary knowledge of the non-Christian religious systems and culture around him" (while admitting he had a "Christocentric core" in his preaching), Mission in the Making, p. 217-218. Prof. William Danker at least admitted in the 1964 book Moving Frontiers (p. 302) that this missionary, Theodore Naether ("almost an atheist"?), "is honored to this day by Indian Christians" (Naether article: DL 1, 2). This blog has published only a small sampling showing Pieper's (and old Missouri's) "great knowledge", the tremendous number of reports on news from America and around the world – on WW I, secret societies, church conditions around the world, especially in Germany. etc. So when Pelikan made his report directly to the Germans of how American Lutherans (i.e. Missourians) were unmindful of the so-called "reawakening of confessional consciousness" in Germany, he was promoting fiction. — Pieper's interest in naval matters was corroborated by Prof. Th. Graebner in his biography of Pieper:

“To the end of his life he was proud of the navy button in his lapel which he carried as member of a national patriotic organization supporting the naval program of our country. At social gatherings he almost invariably discussed civic and national affairs, often with a good deal of humor and with an acute appraisal of men and issues.” (Dr. Francis Pieper - A Biographical Sketch, page 54)

      Fürbringer spoke of a "humorous streak" in Pieper.  I recall this vividly myself when I read from one of Pieper's lectures – published in English translation by O. Marc Tangner, Luther Academy / Logia, $10.98).  In the German edition p 14, Tangner p. 12-13, Pieper says:

“The doctrine of works is the position, the life, the driving force, the principle of the papacy. If the pope were ever to give up his doctrine of works, then his very essence would vanish. He could then tack a sign to the Vatican door with the words: 

‘For Rent’.”

We see in this an example of what Fürbringer meant when he said Pieper's "humorous streak" had "a serious, biblical background". —  In the next Part 10…

Memories 8: Christliche Dogmatik– simple, clear Scriptural truth; “this instrument of the Lutheran Church”

      This continues from Part 7 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a series by Prof. Ludwig Fürbringer of his personal memories of the departed Franz Pieper in the 1931 Der Lutheraner magazine. — The background information on Pieper's Dogmatik is revealed in more detail in this segment. This is supplemental to what he said in his series "Dr. F. Pieper as Theologian" here and here.

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

(page 281, col. 2)

Memories of Dr. Franz Pieper.

by Ludwig Fürbringer – [3.] (Part 8 of 16)

And because, as I have just stated, he started from the only correct point of view, that the main task of a teacher is to teach and to delve deeper and deeper into the objects which he has to teach, he was also in a position to create such a thorough, immortal work, his three-volume Christliche Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics].  Therefore I may perhaps remark here that in retrospect it seems to me a wise coincidence that he, who was also President of the Synod from 1899 to 1911, was then released from this office.

He had already published a booklet in 1898 [Die Lehre von Christi Werk] as a part of his dogmatics, but the many jobs that he had to provide as a president did not allow him to continue as he wished. However that changed when he could confine himself to his work at the institution; and we junior colleagues also saw to it that he was spared as much as possible with other work that was otherwise associated with a professorship here, such as reviewing manuscripts, etc., so that he could concentrate his time and energy on this great work. And the result of this efficient work in the years from 1917 to 1924, everyone within our church knows. I can cite many testimonies, but I want to leave it at two. Just today, as I am writing this, a member of our ministry, a city pastor, who was already active in office for over forty years, wrote in a letter to me:

“I am working through Dr. Pieper's Dogmatics for the fourth time.”  And the crown and the highest praise that must be accorded to this work is that it expresses the simple, clear Scriptural truth. This is also recognized in other circles. A teacher of dogmatics in Germany, not from our Free Church [ELFK-Oberursel], but close to us, who knows and uses Dr. Pieper’s Dogmatik, wrote a special letter to me and said in it: “Since I read the news of Professor Pieper's passing [Heimgang - “going home”], it was my intention to express from my heart my sympathy to you over the loss you and the Concordia Seminary have suffered through the death of this faithful and blessed scribe, who was a true theologian. But on his coffin you have been able to thank the Lord greatly for the rich blessing He has bestowed by this instrument of the Lutheran Church, and this restless worker had done his life's work, ‘come to thy grave in a full age, like as a shock of corn cometh in in his season.’ [Job 5:26]  In his writings he will live on, and they will continue his work, and I had hoped it would still be his to give a concise compendium of dogmatics that we so desperately need, but he probably did not find the time.

“a brief but comprehensive…
dogmatic”

Another one [J.T. Mueller, Christian Dogmatics, ] will be called upon to write the work of art in a linguistically acclaimed expression of a brief but comprehensive theological presentation of the orthodox Lutheran doctrine. God grant that this will happen soon!” Already in an earlier letter, during the lifetime of Dr. Pieper, the same writer had remarked: “It would be very much desirable to make a short dogmatic (page 283, col. 1) textbook that contained the scriptural confession of our church in all its parts. May it be that Dr. Pieper be given to write such and to give it to the church! This could greatly contribute to bringing about the true knowledge of the truth in the Lutheran Church.” I know that a few years ago Dr. Pieper thought of authoring such a compendium or short summary of the Christian doctrine. I had also communicated the above request to him, but unfortunately he did not get around to it.

- - - - - - - - - - - -  continued in Part 9  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Fürbringer and Pieper both apparently knew of the need for a "brief" Dogmatics. I wonder whether Pieper was the one to ask John Theodore Mueller to do this work before he "went home". I would like to think that he did, but even so, Mueller surely knew of the need and carried out the “compendium” project.  I have been amazed at how popular my blog post with a download of Mueller's work became – it is nearly the most read of my blog posts.  Let me repeat again all the languages that Mueller's "abridged" work has been translated into from the original English:

Spanish, Swedish, French (2 versions), Finnish, Chinese, Latvian, Russian, Portuguese, Polish, Zulu, and German.

Robert Kolb wrote a preface to the Latvian translation and charged Mueller-Pieper's work with using the "Aristotelian method" ("aristotelisko metodi") or a deductive method (p. 8).  This charge was made even though Pieper always based his theology solidly on the words of Holy Scripture and not on "theological deduction".  Kolb's charge is the same as that of the "faculty majority" of Concordia Seminary that staged the 1974 "Walkout".  To any Latvians reading this, you should know that Kolb's charge of "Aristotelian method" is false and that they should rather ignore Kolb's works and stick with Pieper and Mueller's Dogmatics.  The works of Robert Kolb (and many other questionable works) have so infiltrated the Lutheran Heritage Foundation that I wonder that Mueller-Pieper will not be translated into any more languages. If anyone in the world would like any one of the translations above but are unable to obtain it, let me know. — In the next Part 9...

Memories 7: Fürbringer- new Prof.: “learned constantly”; "translated justification into daily life"

      This continues from Part 6 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a series by Prof. Ludwig Fürbringer (LF) of his personal memories of the departed Franz Pieper in the 1931 Der Lutheraner magazine. —  In this segment we hear testimony of Pieper's masterful polemics against the adversaries, that they were “never directed against their person”.  Along with Pieper's exceptional theological skills, Fürbringer impresses his readers that Pieper was “a courteous and friendly man”, not combative.

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

(page 281, col. 2)

Memories of Dr. Franz Pieper.

by Ludwig Fürbringer – [3.] (Part 7 of 16)

It was in August 1893, when I arrived at the seminary in St. Louis after the call was accepted, and from that time on I was allowed to work as a younger colleague at Dr. Pieper's side and could observe and become acquainted with him in all his excellent work and also in his daily life. Throughout his many years I have learned from him constantly, partly through his many informative remarks, partly through his always so clear discussions and reviews in faculty sessions, partly through his writings: through his many articles in Lehre und Wehre, his instructive synodical essays and above all by his three-volume (page 282, col. 1) Christliche Dogmatik [Christian Dogmatics]. During these long years I have also experienced much personal friendliness from him, and even if we were in one or another point – but never in doctrinal things or central issues – of a different opinion and also debated, he nevertheless never held a grudge over this with his colleagues.

He was just an exemplary Christian who translated the doctrine of justification into daily life, and at the same time a courteous and friendly man. This was also known to his adversaries, including those who stood on the other side in the dispute over the Doctrine of the Election of Grace, that his polemic was never directed against their person. He was always concerned only with the matter at hand: the faithful preservation of pure doctrine. I remember that an attempt was made a couple of years ago to bring together the two main opponents in this doctrinal dispute, Dr. Pieper and Dr. Stellhorn of the Ohio Synod, to a private debate. I remember how willing Dr. Pieper was then and how Dr. Stellhorn also acknowledged this and recognized it in his letter. But nothing came of this gathering. This kindness of Pieper was soon noticed by the laity. My old, now long-gone, original uncle, who from the older days of the Synod was also known in wider circles, Dr. E. E. Bünger of Altenburg, Perry County, Missouri (an original in every respect, as they are rare today) was quite familiar by relationship with a fighter on the other side in this doctrinal dispute and received from him the church paper which often brought attacks on Dr. Pieper. He had never met Pieper, and I happened to be present when they first greeted each other. And afterwards he told me of his own accord that he had always thought, according to the descriptions of his opponents, that Pieper was a presumptuous, unfriendly, opinionated man, and he could not wonder enough after this meeting and conversation with him, what a friendly, amiable man he was.

When I entered the faculty and almost at the same time as my longtime friend, neighbor and colleague, who died in December last year, blessedly Dr. Bente, we were the two younger members with the three older ones, and I still remember many a faculty meeting, in which we mostly remained silent and listened to the older gentlemen. And at the end of these we exchanged ideas about the varied and complementary gifts of these three men whose memory is always to be upheld in the history of our synod: besides Pieper, the splendid expositor, and the resolute, but also the winning, original Georg Stöckhardt, and the versatile, always ready-to-serve and unselfish historian August Graebner. Now the last of them has come to the rest for the people of God.

But it was during these many years of collaboration that I was able to observe that Dr. Pieper was always eager to work on the professorship. And now everyone in our synod knows what a great teacher he was, who taught the subjects he had to teach, especially the dogmatics or Christian doctrine, and then the pastoral theology or instruction to align the preaching ministry in its various branches, so knew clearly and distinctly and clearly that anyone who listened to him understood him and became firm in the matter.

And not only did he know how to teach excellently, but also to warm the hearts of the students for the office which he himself always called the highest office in the Church, the preaching ministry, the preaching of the Gospel. The students soon realized that in his teaching he did not care for mere knowledge, but that as he himself lived in the Gospel, so his own (page 282, col. 2) students be made proper living witnesses of the Gospel.  

That is why his lectures were so highly valued, and I know from more than one of his former listeners what a deep impression Pieper’s lectures made on their personal life of faith. That is why he did not begin his lectures in American sectarian style with a prayer, but once he came to this point, he emphasized that the lecture itself was worship and prayer service. He worked incessantly on his lectures, always applying the bettering hand to his concise dictum in Dogmatics, always choosing a shorter, possibly clearer, more apt expression.

- - - - - - - - - - - -  continued in Part 8  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

      It was pleasant to read how Pieper was an "amiable man", yet it is more pleasant that Pieper would not succumb to an unspiritual likableness by giving in to opponents on points of Christian doctrine.
      Fürbringer admits in this segment that he held “a different opinion” than Pieper on certain points.  Yet he leaves these differences of opinion out of his “memories”.  I wonder that these differences showed up in his Theological Hermeneutics textbook and his Introduction To The Old Testament where several LC-MS theologians have found refuge for their biblical criticism, "historical" or otherwise.  We note the anecdotal account, circa 1930, from A. T. Kretzmann reporting possible early signs of the weakening of the St. Louis faculty, including Fürbringer. Was the faculty even then more interested in "mere knowledge" than teaching and defending the true faith?  Also note Fürbringer's own son, Alfred O. Fuerbringer, referred to his father's Introduction to the Old Testament as a pretext for his own "moderate" (i.e. liberal) teaching on Holy Scripture.

      I was struck by the statement concerning Pieper's lectures, that “the lecture itself was worship and prayer service”.  Since we possess so few of Pieper's sermons in print, we may take his essays and lectures as his sermons. We note that in the few sermons that were published, he did begin them with a prayer.  —  In the next Part 8…

Memories 6: Pieper’s essays; 1st Brief Statement; Fürbringer called to faculty

      This continues from Part 5 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a series by Prof. Ludwig Fürbringer of his personal memories of the departed Franz Pieper in the 1931 Der Lutheraner magazine. — These "memories" of Fürbringer were wide-ranging.  To his credit, he recognized, to a certain extent, the greatness of Franz Pieper.  And his highlighting of Pieper's major essays delivered before Synod conventions gives us readers a true picture of that greatness.

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

(page 266, col. 2)

Memories of Dr. Franz Pieper.

by Ludwig Fürbringer – [2.] (Part 6 of 16)

For three years I was allowed to study under Pieper and the other unforgettable members of the faculty: Walther, Günther, Schaller, Lange, and Stöckhardt, who at the time was not a full professor, but a so-called Professor extraordinarius and pastor of Holy Cross congregation. And I can safely say that I often looked up the notes that I made in the lectures of these men in later life and still occasionally use them today. The deepest stimulus emanated from these men on my whole theological, religious and personal life. And the same will be witnessed by the 3,394 candidates for preaching who made their examinations here in St Louis during the fifty-three years of Pieper’s activity, and who entered the service of our Church with only a few exceptions. Also then in the years 1885 to 1893, I have seen and heard Dr. Pieper nearly every year. So during the Synod of the year 1887 in Fort Wayne, Dr. Walther went to his blessed eternal home. Stöckhardt had stayed in St Louis to be close to Walther in his last days, while Pieper attended the Synod.

In 1888, he then delivered one of his many, (page 267, col. 1) beautiful synod essays at the Synodical Conference meeting in Milwaukee on the “Unity in Faith”, and I had the opportunity to hear it. At that time I was particularly interested to hear, in addition to Pieper, also for the first time Dr. A. Hönecke of the Wisconsin Synod, the keynote speaker with Pieper at the meeting, and the friendly discussions that both often had; but also Bente emerged at that time. In the years 1887 and 1889 I visited St Louis and at least I was allowed to visit my revered teachers briefly. In 1890, Pieper again came to the fore at the Delegate Synod in Milwaukee and, as at the 1884 meeting, presented one of his short, excellent papers, as well as in 1893 at the St Louis assembly. In 1884, the subject matter [“Scripture Doctrine”], suggested by the relations of the time, was the question of when only is a doctrine a doctrine of Scripture, namely, only if it is based on the express written Word, and what results therefrom. In 1890 he dealt with the theme: "The Gospel or the Pure Doctrine of Justification, the Source of Proper Enthusiasm and the Right Guide to All Work in the Kingdom of God";

In 1893 he gave an “Overview of Our Position in Doctrine and Practice, Which We Take as a Synod on the Surrounding Error and Abuse” [LCR translation], perhaps the most common and best-known of his papers, which I have in a handy separate print since then, and handed over or sent innumerable times to those who did not know our synod and sought information from me. But it was quite natural that, as a young pastor, I only greeted him and my other teachers on such occasions, and did not rob them of their time as they were busy and men in much demand. But from those years I have an opinion from Pieper's hand, in which he gave good, proven advice on behalf of the faculty for my then congregation and myself in a difficult marriage case. of Faculty”

There came, I would like to say like a flash of lightning from heaven, when I was already on my way to New York for a trip to Germany, the news of my election as a member of the St Louis Faculty, after Lange in October 1892 and Günther in May 1893 had blessedly gone home. When I think back now, I must still wonder as much as I did then that the choice fell on me.  And more than once I wondered what my former teachers, who in 1887 had appointed A. L. Graebner as the professor in the place of Schaller's professorship, had come to think of my choice in their heart. Nevertheless they all were so friendly, when I asked them in Chicago at the conference of professors of that year for their open expressions of opinion, to encourage me to accept the call. And so in August 1893 I joined the faculty as the youngest member, where after a few months already my longtime friend, and colleague Bente followed. From then on I have been able to teach and work at Dr. Pieper’s side for almost 38 years. And what I have learned from him in these many years dear and good, what I have learned from him to his death, remains one of the most pleasant memories of my life, about which I would like to write further next time. L[udwig] F[ührbringer].

- - - - - - - - - - - -  continued in Part 7  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

      Fürbringer reports that the relationship between Franz Pieper and the Wisconsin Synod's leader Adolf Hönecke was quite good – "the friendly discussions that both often had".  This is in stark contrast to the report of Wisconsin's historian J.P. Koehler.  It was claimed by Koehler that Hönecke told him privately in 1878 the following about the “Missourians” (History of the Wisconsin Synod, p. 153):

“There is something sectarian about them.” (the Missourians)

It would appear that either Hönecke was being duplicitous with Pieper or Koehler was intentionally creating discord between the two synods with his "history".  I am convinced by Fürbringer's account that relations were indeed quite good between the Missourians and Wisconsin, especially before Koehler gained ascendancy after the death of John Schaller in 1920.

      Fürbringer characterizes the earliest "Brief Statement" of 1893 as the "most common and best-known of his papers". I am providing an English translation by the LCR of this essay in 1971 here.  It is worthy of reading today to see a true Lutheran teacher lay down truly Christian assertions in defense of the faith.  This essay actually predates his 1897 writing that is considered by some, e.g. Dr. Lawrence Rast, as the first "Brief Statement".

      The "longtime friend, and colleague [Friedrich] Bente" is mentioned in this narrative. As I reviewed Old Missouri's history years ago, I wished that it had been Bente who wrote these memories of Pieper, as he was stronger than Fürbringer in upholding the pure Gospel and the divinity of Holy Scripture against erring American Lutherans. Bente is reported by his wife to have said this of Pieper's Dogmatik (Biography, p. 108):

“It was written by the right man, at the right time, in the right way. It leaves for the reviewer nothing but reiteration, emphasis, and enthusiastic acclaim.”

But since Bente passed away a few months before Pieper, we must settle on these memoirs of Fürbringer. It is indicative of today's LC-MS that Bente is given virtually no credit for his work on the Concordia Triglotta in the lastest Kolb-Wengert Book of Concord. Bente's masterful Historical Introductions, although sold by CPH, is almost universally faulted by its theologians. The newest Kolb-Wengert book, admitted to be a unionistic work, has "richer historical context" (sigh). — In the next Part 7…