CONCORDIA THEOLOGICAL MONTHLY Luther as Exegete DOUGLAS CARTER The Historical Background of "A Brief Statement" CARL S. MEYER Brief Studies Homiletics Theological Observer Book Review Septe111ber 1961 No.9 The Historical Background of "A Brief Statement" (Concluded) By CARL S. MEYER The union negotiations among the Nor­ are insignificant when compared with the wegians served to take most of the Nor­ free conferences held in Watertown, Wis., wegian Synod's members out of direct in 1903, Milwaukee in 1903, Detroit in fellowship with the Missourians. The con­ 1904, and Fort Wayne in 1905. summation of the Norwegian union The first of these free conferences, held seemed, on the other hand, to direct the in Watertown, Wis., April 29 and 30, Ohio and Iowa synods toward each other 1903, as is true of the others, was not and possibly toward the Missouri Synod. sponsored officially by any synod. The There were other factors, of course, which Joint Synod of Wisconsin, Minnesota, and tended to bring about a partial temporary Michigan had the largest representation amelioration of the animosity between the there - 85 ou:: of 205. The Rev. M. synods. One of these factors was a series of Bunge, a member of the Wisconsin Synod, free conferences held in the early years of was the leader in arranging the conference. the twentieth century. Fifteen men each from the Iowa and the Sporadic conferences were held in the Ohio Synod attended; 62 were present 1890s. Two such conferences in Canada in from the Missouri Synod.123 Prof. Francis 1892 - perhaps there were more in later Pieper lectured on the topic, "Die Grund­ years - were regarded as being directed differenzen in der Lehre von der Bekeh­ against the Missouri Synod.120 Five years rung und Gnadenwahl." In five points he or so later free conferences were held be­ gave the Missouri Synod teaching: (1) tween members of the Ohio Synod and the Scripture teaches that the reason for the Missouri Synod, entirely private in charac­ conversion and the salvation of those who ter.121 In May 1902, a free conference was are actually converted and saved is solely held in Beloit, Wis.122 These conferences the grace of God in Christ; (2) Scripture teaches that when some are not converted 120 Der Lutberaner, XLVIII (March 1892), and are lost, it is solely the fault of man 41; ibid., XLVIII (Oct. 25, 1892), 176. F. P[ieper}, "Zur kirchlichen Chronik," ibid., in resisting the work of the Spirit; (3) XLVIII (March 29, 1892), 57; "Was sie zu ---­ Stande bringen wollen, ist nicht sowohl eine accord on the conditions for fellowship and on kirchliche Einigung der Lutheraner, als ein Bund open questions. F. B[ente}, "Kirchlich-Zeitge- gegen Missouri." (Italics in the original.) schichtliches," ibid., L (September 1904), 420 121 Idem, "Vorwort," Lehre und Webre, to 422, citing the Bericht of the conference pub- XLV (January 1899). 2, 3. lished by Concordia Publishing House, St. Louis, 122 Ibid., XLIX (May 1903), 142; ibid., in 1904. XLVIII (July and August 1902), 234, 235. 123 F. B[ente], "Die freie Conferenz von A free conference between pastors of the Watertown," "Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches," Michigan Synod and the Missouri Synod on ibid., XLIX (May 1903), 142. Bente, however, June 12 and 13, 1904, in Jackson, Mich., found gave the dates as May 29, 30. 526 THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF "A BRIEF STATEMENT" 527 What lies beyond these two truths be­ A second free conference was held in longs to the unfathomable ways of God; 1903, this one in Milwaukee, Sept. 9-11, ( 4) There is no reasonable, logical (ver­ attended by more than 700 persons. There nunftgemasze) answer to the question: Cur were 500 persons who actually registered, alii prae aliis? (5) The circumstance that of whom 377 belonged to the Synodical the Gospel has not been preached to all Conference. Two questions occupied this peoples of all times does not contradict the conference: "I. What is the relationship truth of God's grace.124 of the universal gracious will of God (der As a result of this conference a com­ allgemeine Gnadenwille Gattes) to predes­ mittee was elected to arrange another tination (Gnadenwahl)? 2. Must those pas­ free conference. The conference was com­ sages of Holy Writ, which ex prafessa deal mended because it sought unity of spirit with predestination (e. g., Eph. 1: 1-6, in doctrine, did not gloss over differences, 2 Thess. 2: 13, Acts 13:48), be interpreted but aimed at removing the differences for according to John 3: 16 and similar pas­ a God-pleasing unity. Unity was not sages on universal grace?" 126 The debate thought of as being dependent on ex­ revolved around principles of Scriptural ternals. Holy Scriptures (this was a basic interpretation. However, another free con­ assumption) must be the source and norm fererLce was scheduled for Detroit in of all doctrines in agreement with the 1904.127 Lutheran Symbols.125 Between the Milwaukee and the Detroit conference a meeting of the Planning Com­ 124 F. P [ieper], "Freie Conferenz," "Kirch­ mittee was held in Chicago on Dec. 29, lich-Zeitgeschichtliches," ibid., XLIX (May 1903. Present were: F. Pieper and G. 1903),143f. Stoeckhardt, Missouri Synod; A. Hoenecke Idem, "Die Berichte liber die Conferenz in Watertown," Lehre und Wehre, XLIX (May and A. Pieper, Wisconsin Synod; F. Richter 1903), 129-132, defended himself against the and M. Fritschel, Iowa Synod; H. G. Stub, report in the Lutheran, that he modified his Norwegian Synod; H. A. Allwardt, H. (and the Missouri Synod's and the Synodical Conference's) position. He said (pp. 130, 131): Ernst, andF. W. Stellhorn, from the Ohio "Ich habe in Watertown nichts modifiziert und Synod. The Ohio Synod representatives nichts verdeckt, sondern unsere SteHung, wie ich wanted to make the 1877 theses (North­ sie seit 25 Jahren vertreten habe, unumwunden ins Licht gerlickt." ern District of the Missouri Synod) on the F. B[ente] also found fault with Nicum's analogia fidei the subject of discussion, and report in the Lutheran and cited other journals the first two theses were actually discussed. which did not agree with Nicum. "Die freie Conferenz in Watertown," "Kirchlich-Zeitge­ The committee members agreed to formu­ schichtliches," Lehre und Wehre, XLIX (July­ late positions on this doctrine and to dis­ August 1903), 232 f. cuss the analogia fidei at the Detroit con­ Pieper's essay was printed. Die Grunddi/­ 128 /erenz in der Lehre von der Bekehrung und ference. Gnadenwahl (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1903), 48 pages. F. B[ente] closed his 126 Idem, "Die freie Conferenz in Milwaukee," review of the essay: "Diese Schrift Dr. Piepers "Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches," ibid., XLIX ist ein Eirenicon irn besten Sinne des Wortes." (October 1903), 304. Ibid., XLIX (October 1903), 301. 127 Ibid., pp. 304, 305. 125 F. B[ente], ibid., XLIX (May 1903), 128 Idem, "Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches," 142 f. Also see pp. 144, 145. ibid., L (January 1904), 35-37. 528 THE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF "A BRIEF STATEMENT" On April 5, 1904, this committee met Concord. The issue was joined. Does this again in Detroit prior to the conference. passage speak of God's universal plan of It set up two questions: 1. What is the salvation or of God's eternal decree of analogy of faith? 2. How is the analogy election? No agreement was reached, al­ of faith to be used? The two-day discussion though arrangements were made for an­ in the free conference (April 1904) raged other free conference in the coming year.l32 about these questions, the doctrines of elec­ The Missourians, it was admitted, had tion and conversion receiving references little zeal for further meetings, because of most frequently. In spite of lack of agree­ the uncomplimentary reports circulated ment the large assembly (about 500 men) about their Synod. They were certain that voted to meet in Fort Wayne in the fol­ the free conferences were not successful lowing year to discuss the doctrine of pre­ in convincing their opponents of the error destination.129 of their position. Dr. Pieper was attacked The Detroit Free Conference did not by the Ohio church papers. However, the have the opportunity to discuss the areas Missourians were reluctant to break off the of agreement and disagreement regarding conferences.133 Missouri was blamed for analo gia fidei as set forth for each side re­ the 50 years of disunity in the Lutheran spectively by Stellhorn (Ohio and Iowa) church since the organization of the Gen­ and by Pieper (Synodical Conference and eral Councip34 It was branded as a sect.135 Norwegian Synod). The committee, at the request of the Ohio Synod, had substituted 132 G. St[oeckhardt], "Freie Conferenz in the two general questions which were dis­ Fort Wayne," in "Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches," 130 ibid., 11 (August 1905), 368-372. cussed. Subsequently Pieper formulated See idem, "Was lehrt St. Paulus Epheser sentences on hermeneutical principles in 1:3-14 von der Gnadenwahl?" ibid., 11 (Octo· their relationship to the analogia fidei. 131 ber 1905), 433-446; ibid., 11 (November In 1905 (Aug. 8-10) the fourth of the 1905),481-489. F. B[enteJ, "Die intersynodale Konferenz in free conferences was held. This one took Fort Wayne," ibid., LII (December 1906), 529 place in Fort Wayne, attended by 200 to to 545; ibid., LlII (January 1907), 18-33; 300 men. Eph.1 was discussed; this led to ibid., LIII (February 1907), 77-87. See also idem, "Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches," a discussion of Art. XI of the Formula of ibid., LIII (January 1907), 36--38. F., "Kirchlich-Zeitgeschichtliches," ibid., LIIl 129 G. St[oeckhardtJ, "Kirchlich-Zeitge- (March 1907), 127-129.