Wohlrabe to Cascione: (3)
Who are the disgruntled laymen?
Doctor Wohlrabe and I have many areas of agreement. However, there is a fundamental principle on which we strongly disagree, namely, Voter supremacy in the congregation. Doctor Wohlrabe also seeks to identify my insistence on Voter supremacy with the position of Dr Eduard Vehse, whom he rejects as a "disgruntled layman."
Wohlrabe writes:
"The position that you have articulated in your articles, placing the pastoral office beneath the church by way of a voters' assembly, is the position of Carl Eduard Vehse, a disgruntled layman of the Saxonite Emigration. It is not the position of Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm Walther."Cascione replies:
Yet, when one reads the history of the LCMS in regards to Dr. Vehse and Dr. Marbach we learn they are the great-unsung saints who helped found the LCMS. The reader asks, "What, did he say? Laymen founded the LCMS!" That is exactly what I said.How sad it is when one views the front cover of the April 1997 issue of the Lutheran Witness, recognizing the 150th anniversary of the LCMS, and all one sees are the faces and names of its clergy such as Rev, August Craemer, Rev. Wilhlem Loehe, Dr. Walther, and Rev. Wyneken, all great men, indeed. However, not the front cover nor any article in the issue mentions the names of the 700 people who left Dresden in 1838 and eventually founded the LCMS.
Vehse may have overstated the role of the congregation, but much of what he said became the very inspiration and basis of Walther's "Church and Ministry" and the foundation of the LCMS. But who knows it today?
All the laypeople did was fund everything with their sweat and sacrifice. Now, with the revival of the "clergy cast" 152 years after the founding of the LCMS, we have conveniently forgotten where it all came from. Yes, it came from the Lord, but He gave much of what we have today in the LCMS through the hands of laypeople. It wasn't 100% clergy. In fact, the clergy, including Walther, initially fought vigorously against the laypeople for control of the church.
Wohlrabe Attacks Vehse and Voter Supremacy
Cascione Asked:
"(18 ) If Walther did not have in mind from the beginning of the Synod that the Voters were supreme, why does he constantly make the Voters' Assembly the highest court and not equal with the pastor?"Wohlrabe Replies:
"Why didn't Walther argue polity as an issue with Grabau and Loehe in "Kirche und Amt" and elsewhere? He didn't because the real issue was doctrine. The true Holy Christian Church is invisible and is wherever God's Word is preached and enough of the Sacraments are rightly administered (as opposed to Grabau who held that salvation came only through the Lutheran church). This true church has the office of the keys (as opposed to Grabau and Loehe who held that the ministerium possesses the office of the keys). Christians have an obligation to join orthodox Christian congregations. The ministry is a separate office from the priesthood of all believers and the highest office in the church and is to be obeyed when he is proclaiming the Word of God (as opposed to Vehse). Yet, it is conferred through the church and ordination is an apostolic rite and good churchly practice which recognizes the call (as opposed to Grabau and Loehe ). The pastor has no right to set forth new laws or ceremonies or impose excommunication alone (as opposed to Grabau and Loehe)"Cascione Comments:
"My purpose for defending the supremacy of Voters' Assemblies, as originally taught by Walther, is to preserve the marvelous God-given Christian freedom that was the great gift and biblical heritage of the LCMS. In many parts of Synod we now witness the abuse of church power by financial institutions, District Offices, Boards, and pastors who claim divine right to alter and reinvent worship and church polity in the name of God."Wohlrabe Replies:
"We share the same goal. I hope you can see that. However, I believe you are incorrectly placing the congregation over the pastoral office (similar to the position of Vehse ) in an effort to combat clerical and bureaucratic abuse. In pushing the pendulum, you have pushed it too far."The Principles of Congregational Government in the LCMS Came From Lay People!
Cascione Replies:
Pushed too far! (All of the following quotations will be taken from "Government in the Missouri Synod, by Carl Mundinger, CPH, St. Louis 1947.) If the circumstance of the Lutheran commune founded by Stephan in Perry County, MO, were repeated today, with the number of deaths by exposure, harsh living conditions, and the misappropriation of funds, while Stephan lived in a fine house and had a wine cellar, the clergy who assisted him, including Walther, would be serving time.Yes, Dr. Wohlrabe could call Dr. Vehse "disgruntled." Under the adverse conditions they had to endure, his brother-in-law, Dr. Marbach, and Mrs. Marbach only lost five children. Forester, in "Zion on the Mississippi" wonders why Mrs. Marbach didn't lose her mind. (Page 530) In all, counting the sinking of the Amalia, nearly 1/3 of the colonists died in the quest of serving an orthodox, confessional, adulterous, dictator as a living means of grace (Hauptgnadenmittel) [head grace mediator] (Page 94) (The reader should memorize this word.. Before Walther was fired and then had his conversion experience, Walther, along with the rest of the clergy, supported everything that Stephan did. When the clergy discovered they were defending an adulterer, Mundinger records:
"The pastors did everything. They considered themselves a final court of trial. The whole procedure was based upon the medieval assumption that the Church consists of the clergy and that the laymen have no part in the government of the Church." (Page 88)
"The fact that the laymen had previously gotten out a document in which they pleaded for participation of the laity in the action against Stephan and in which they pointed to the convention of laymen and pastor described in Acts 15 that the pastor had resigned their commissions in Germany and were temporary without calls-seemed to have not effect upon die Herrn Amtsbrueder [bored bureaucratic cronies]". (Page 89) (The reader should memorize this German phrase.)
"The clerical faction was gradually headed by C. F. W. Walther and the lay faction by Dr. Carl Eduard Vehse, perhaps the most learned of the entire group." (Page 95)
The magnificent contribution of the lay people may be ignored in 1999, but in 1947, in its centennial year, the LCMS was bold to publish the contributions that were made by the laity to the founding of the LCMS. I will give just a few of the quotations from Mundinger the contribution of the laity Wohlrabe calls "disgruntled".
Mundinger writes: "Walther was realistic enough to see that Vehse's theories, now espoused by Marbach and Berger, had many adherents through the colony." (Page112)
"Walther, on the other hand, took his cue from Vehse and attacked the problem from the viewpoint of sixteenth century theology." (Page 120)
"Theses IV-VIII supplement Vehse and therefore are really, as they existed at the moment, the heart of Walther's contributions at Altenburg." (Page 121)
"Unhesitatingly he [Walther] acknowledges the contribution which Vehse, Fisher, and Jaeckel had made with their document of September 19, 1839." (Page122)
Simply but quietly he [Walther] built his case on the same authority which Marbach, Buerger, Vehse, Fisher, Jaeckel and Wedge had used. (Page 123).
"Just how did the principles which Vehse and Walther derived from the writings of Luther work out in the day-to-day life of a Lutheran Congregation?" (Page 125)
This is Really the Vehse-Walther-Lutheran Church Missouri Synod
Not only does Mundinger show the degree of initiative that was taken by the laity to straighten out the mess in Perry County, he also describes the current structure of the LCMS as being based on the "Vehse-Walther-Luther principles." It is little wonder that the name Vehse has become the equivalent of McCarthyism at both LCMS Seminaries. If you want to smear another pastor who promotes Voter supremacy as taught by the LCMS for its first hundred years, just throw the "Vehse" word at him. No one will know what it means but it's very bad. Mundinger writes:
"The demand for lay participation in the government of the Church did not come until September 19, 1839. The demand came from a group of laymen led by Dr. Eduard Vehse." (Page 204)
"The present writer has gone over the minutes of the early years several times with a view to tracing the application of the Vehse-Walther-Luther principle." (Page 125)
"In fine, the principles which Vehse and Marbach had gathered form the writing of Luther, and which Walther adopted, were beginning to determine the routine of the congregation." (Page 162)
The Foundation of the LCMS Constitution Came From the Voters of Trinity Congregation
Where did the LCMS Constitution come from? To my surprise, Mundinger demonstrates, article by article, that the structure and articles of the LCMS were worked out in detail in the Voters' meetings of Trinity Lutheran Church in St. Louis. Mundinger writes: "In a certain sense one may call the constitution of the Missouri Synod the result of a seven-year battle for congregation rights." (Page 179). That battle largely took place in the Voter's meetings of Trinity Lutheran Church where Walther was often excluded admission.
The influence of the laymen of Trinity congregation on the LCMS was enormous. Mundinger observes: ".and Trinity Congregation, St. Louis, became the leading congregation of the Missouri Synod and remained so for over half a century." (Page 177)
It was Trinity congregation that pushed the following "legalism" on the entire LCMS. "The constitution also insisted on purely Lutheran forms of worship, hymnbooks, Catechism, and readers in the parish schools." (Page 184) For more than a 125 years they were able to restrain the clergy from inventing new Creeds and so called worship for their own goals now proliferating the Synod.
The laypeople of Trinity mobilized laypeople through the United States in the battle for congregation supremacy by influencing the lay delegates and clergy at the LCMS Convention. At the suggestion of Walther, they financed a "Zeitschrift." The magazine became "Der Lutheraner" (Page 170)
"It (Der Lutheraner) was a channel through which Luther's concepts of church government and of doctrine generally flowed incessantly to the Lutheran laity of the American frontier, and it was a means of publicity whereby the Saxon pastors placed what they believed to be a true picture of themselves, their doctrine, and polity before the Lutheran Church of America." (Page 170)
The Laypeople Led Walther to Repentance
Walther, who had virtually been Stephan's attack dog, was now Saul become Paul on the doctrine of Church and Ministry. He became the most ardent proponent of congregational supremacy to the point that Loehe, pictured on the front cover of the April 1997 LCMS Lutheran Witness, broke fellowship with the LCMS. Now the laity who founded and funded "Der Lutheraner" have no place on its front cover. The LCMS laity should take heed when they see a glowing report of Loehe, who opposed them, in the Lutheran Witness and absolutely no mention of the laity who built the Synod. The direction is obvious.
One could read Mundinger's book and come to the conclusion that after his complicity in the debacle at Perry County, Walther lived a life of repentance, promoting congregational supremacy that thousands of LCMS clergy and the COP are trying to suppress in the name of growth and divine order.
Vehse's insistence on Congregational supremacy was countered by the pastors (including Walther) who spread the story that he was speaking for the devil (der Teufel rede aus ihm, Page 213). That was more than he could take. He returned to Germany. However, his brother-in-law, Marbach, continued the struggle. By the grace of God, Marbach (still under Stephan's influence on this issue) lost the debate as to whether the local congregation is the true church but, at the same time, won the battle for congregational supremacy. When the laity had been convinced by Vehse's writings a few years after he left for Germany they voted that Walther stand up and read from Vehse's book for three days in the Voters' Assembly. Walther in his "Church and Ministry" later quoted many of the same quotations from Luther and others, gathered by Vehse.
Mundinger writes: "August 1, 1842, it was resolved that Pastor Walther read the testimonies in Vehse's book which refer to the rights of a congregation. August 3, 1842, it was decided to continue to hear the testimonies which Dr. Vehse had collected in his book regarding the relationship between the pastor and the congregation. August 10, 1842, the reading of the testimonies which Dr. Vehse had collected was completed." (Page 139)
Under the circumstance of the Synod's founding, we can understand why the following paragraph from Mundinger's book was not published in the April 1997 Lutheran Witness.
"Led by Dr. Vehse from May 30 to December 11, 1839, and after his return to Germany by Dr. F. A. Marbach, a group of highly intelligent laymen propagandized the colony in behalf of laymen's participation in the government of the Church. At the suggestion of Stephan these laymen had studied the writings of Martin Luther for years while they were still in Germany. Their knowledge of Luther's writings was astonishing. Their claims for lay participation in the government of the Church were based primarily upon the earlier statements of Luther concerning the priesthood of all believers. At first the Saxon ministerium, including C.F.W Walther, resisted these laymen most vigorously, as already stated.)" (Page 212)
Stephanism is Returning
In 1999 the Convention has no access to the books of the Lutheran Church Extension Fund, the Pension Fund, and the Foundation. The Foundation reported a loss of $40,000,000.00 from a Treasurer promoted for election by the Council of District Presidents (COP). The COP also defends keeping the books confidential for the good of the church. The debacle is beginning again. During the same time when the Foundation lost $40,000,000.00 on $750,000,000.00 in investments, the Stock Market rose 20%. The COP has encouraged the LCEF to fund the corporate restructuring of congregations for "growth" so that Dr. Norbert Oesch can continue to "retrain" LCMS pastors as CEOs (corporate Herrn Amtsbrueder).
Yes, Dr. Wohlrabe may throw the "Vehse" word at me and the pastors will say Cascione is in error, but what else can I expect from the contemporary aspiring Hauptgnadenmittel and their Herrn Amtsbrueder. Hauptgnadenmittel is just the right word to describe Hyper-Euro-Lutherans.
Die Herrn Amtsbrueder have captured the LCMS District Offices. Their goal is increasing control of congregations and clergy for their own financial and administrative goals. The large Districts must be divided. The career politicians and bureaucrats must be sent packing back to the parish where they can be accountable to Voters' Assemblies. The COP's love for hierarchy has infected and now permeates both Seminaries' Boards of Regents and faculties.
If the 2001 Convention does not insist on Voter supremacy and only Voter supremacy in all LCMS congregations, Stephan wins it all back.
October 21, 1999