Will he elope with Missouri or stay faithful to WELS Enthusiasm?
It is good that he never tagged a sidewalk or he would kicked out pronto.
Happy Valentine's Day, Mark, Mark, and Matt.
Matt was not available for this Photoshop.
Various people amuse me by taking an all or nothing approach to various theologians.
Lenski
Mequon graduates all own their Lenski set, and he is probably valued equally in the LCMS and the Little Sect on the Prairie. The ALC pastors bought Lenski, too. One essay called the Lenski set "the long green line in every pastor's office." I am not sure everyone reads Lenski. He was prolific. His daughter, Lois Lenski, was also a writing machine - in the area of of children's art and literature.
The Lenski New Testament commentaries are a great contribution to Lutheran scholarship, but they are a bit uneven in their quality. For example, Lenski fell for the game of figuring out the original NT manuscripts, based on the questionable, convenient "discoveries" of Tischendorf and the ridiculous theories of Wescott and Hort. Lenski deserves a cuff on the back of the head for that, but it is a minor part of his vast scholarship.
Lenski also tries to establish a middle ground in the UOJ fracas, which was caused by the UOJ faction imposing their weirdness on WELS and Missouri, seeking to displace justification by faith. Although many of Lenski's statements on this issue are wise insights on the New Testament, he also has some others where he tries to establish compromise language based on juggling words, such as talking about an objective and a subjective reconciliation. Lenski's efforts remind me of Byzantine Empire attempts to solve their Two Natures battles, which were truly violent and bloody. Each new compromise forged made the conflict worse and led ultimately to the triumph of Islam in 1453.
The WELS talking point (the only one!) about Lenski is: "he is not good on justification." My Lenski set had its Romans volume, bought from a WELS pastor, still in brand new condition, and the WELS pastor was dead. To be honest, WELS should say, "He teaches justification by faith, based on the grammar and historical context of the NT documents. We hate that."
Lenski also has an unusual grasp of all the Lutheran dogmaticians. Mequon graduates also think they are such experts on the Bible that they do not need commentaries. No wonder they quickly turn to plagiarism, with their Doctrinal Pussycat's smiling approval.
Francis Pieper
I no longer own Pieper's Dogmatics, but I appreciated what I learned from them. The best part was about the Two Natures of Christ, which led me into reading Chemnitz on the Two Natures. I think of Pieper as the Cliff Notes version of Chemnitz.
One Lutheran seminary student began shunning me because I "criticized Pieper." I am a Luther-an, not a Pieper-an. Nevertheless, Luther needs to be read with discernment too. I forgot - I am now Church of the Augsburg Confession, which is what the Book of Concord editors called themselves - theologians of the Augsburg Confession. Luther did too. I like the term because it avoids the baggage of ELCA, WELS, LCMS, ELS, CLC.1, CLC.2, LCR, etc. etc.
American Lutherans should read Pieper but not get stuck there, because he influenced the Syn Conference so much - and still does. His Enthusiasm explains the inroads of Receptionism, Church Growth, and the New Age Movement.
Luther
Luther remains the great theologian, preacher, and Biblical exegete of the Christian Church. I like What Luther Says but Luther's sermons should be the regular reading of all Lutheran pastors and laity.
The trouble today is - no one reads Luther. The high church faction of Ft. Wayne, best represented by ELDONA, skips over Luther and Chemnitz in favor of authors previously unknown in America. Their haphazard reading habits support their dabbling with Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. They must sense that too much Luther would expose their pathetic grasp of Biblical doctrine.
Melanchthon, Chemnitz
Syn Conference Lutherans are quick to point out the timid nature of Melanchthon. He faced potential death and imprisonment after Luther died and the Emperor came back from the Islamic wars. Given the number of Syn Conference pastors who would betray their own mothers for a better call, I have to credit Melanchthon for courage in spite of his eager-to-please nature. He lived through a terrible time of violence and persecution.
Melanchthon, with his long years of training pastors, was perhaps more influential among pastors than Luther. He started younger and lived just as long as Luther - 63 years.
The difference in temperament was good in several ways. Luther valued Melanchthon's irenic nature and his theological abilities. I recall Robert Preus saying in a lecture that Melanchthon was better than Luther on justification - at one point. We were discussing forensic justification, which Melanchthon believed and taught with clarity.
Although Melanchthon's compromising nature set up significant conflicts, his student Martin Chemnitz had the intellect and nature to bring together the warring factions on the basis of genuine confessional doctrine. That is entirely lacking today. Chemnitz united the humor and polemical skills of Luther with the gentleness of Melanchthon.
Luther wrote that the Holy Spirit is so powerful that He can turn the greatest evil into the greatest good. That was true in the crucifixion and also in the Lutheran split after Luther's death. Out of that conflict came the leadership of men like Chemnitz, Chytraeus, Selnecker, and the best single volume of theology and Biblical commentary - the Book of Concord.
Luther, Melanchthon, and Chemnitz remain the three greatest theologians of the Christian Church, so we should major in the majors instead of the minors. They are my Scriptural teachers - not the essay writers of the Syn Conference.
