 |
| As Zion on the Mississippi points out, the ladies'"confession of adultery with Stephan" was bogus, and the clergy admitted later they knew about their bishop's promiscuity. |
Dr. Lito Cruz, an essential part of Team Ichabod, has been sending me material about Walther tonight. The research brings up matters that others have discussed (in hushed tones) in the past.
Here is the link to the dissertation:
http://uir.unisa.ac.za/bitstream/handle/10500/1608/thesis.pdf?sequence=1
Below are some comments from Dr. Cruz -
I was looking at Walther's teaching on Church and Ministry. I stumbled on this thesis
The author of this thesis is pro-Walther yet I find it strange he did not cast suspicion on Walther's theological method.
It must be Waltherolatry.
LPC
According to A. Pieper, dissertation, p 46...
Not only did Walther use terms that were readily misunderstood by others, but another cause for
his naevi [faults], according to his student August Pieper, was that Walther depended too heavily on the secondary sources of theology, i.e., Luther and the lesser fathers. In spite of all his emphasis on Scripture, there can be no denying this. Although Walther was a great, and a very talented leader, he was a poor, even an inferior exegete. He had only an average knowledge of the original biblical languages. Frequently he would cite dozens of Bible passages merely because Luther and the dogmaticians had done so. Yet these passages did not prove what they were supposed to prove. Although very eager to express himself on matters, he failed to recognize that his position was based on translations and not on the original text. Thus, he could say something as if it were doctrinally true, but without a firm scriptural basis. Over all, the knowledge of Scripture that Walther had was more an intimate acquaintance with Luther’s Bible and knowledge of certain passages rather than knowledge of the whole line of thought of a biblical book and of the original text.
Also p. 47-
According to the author
Walther built his theology more heavily on the writings of Luther and his faithful followers than even Walther would admit. This is evident from his entire way of doing theology. This characteristic appears in all his doctrinal books, papers, and essays. “His dogmatics textbook consists entirely of material taken over from others.” The method that Walther used was understandable at a time in which there was searching for true Lutheranism, and it also fully corresponded with Walther’s spiritual development. Another reason that is frequently cited for his use of this format is that he realized how inadequate his knowledge of Scripture and doctrine really was in comparison with Luther and Chemnitz, Gerhard and Calov, thus in all modesty he was afraid of going astray in even the smallest point of doctrine.49
Walther was a great leader and the Lutheran Church benefited much from his leadership, still no matter how justified Walther’s method of citing Luther and the Lutheran dogmaticians might have been in the beginning, it was wrong both in principle and in practice. The problem was that unlike Luther, who stressed the Bible and the study of the Bible, Walther’s positions neither rested directly on Scripture nor did they lead one directly into it. Instead he strongly stressed, to the extreme, the importance of Luther and the Lutheran Confessions and the Lutheran fathers, and certainly much more than he cited God’s Word. Utilizing this format Walther led people to think that the matter under discussion or being presented had been established sufficiently by the quotations from Luther and the fathers; therefore it was unnecessary to study Scripture. This format actually hampered people in their use and study of the Bible. And eventually, it has come to the point where the citation theologians not only quote Luther and the old fathers but now they have also included Walther and others as proof of the doctrinal stand. As pastors, theologians, and theological students took up the study of doctrinal maters in subsequent years the subject of study was not as much a study of the Bible as it was a study of old synodical reports and conference and convention essays. And now quotations from these, not the Bible, are frequently used to support doctrinal positions.50
In other words, LutherQuest (sic) and the ALPB Online Forum suffer from a debilitating flaw -
Instead of accepting the limitations of CFW Walther, BA, Pietist, they make him out to be the greatest theologian of all time.
Therefore, anyone who questions the Great Walther, as he is named on a statue in Missouri, is by definition a rogue, a maggot, and a leper.