Gustav Adolf Theodor Felix Hoenecke by John M. Brenner Emmaus Conference Parkland Lutheran Church - Tacoma, Washington April 28, 2017

Transcription

1 Gustav Adolf Theodor Felix Hoenecke by John M. Brenner Emmaus Conference Parkland Lutheran Church - Tacoma, Washington April 28, 2017 Who was Adolf Hoenecke ( )? He was a reserved and even retiring man, a simple Christian with a brilliant and analytical mind whose impact on the Wisconsin Synod was profound. His life is a demonstration of God s grace as he was led from an unlikely background to become the theological leader of the Wisconsin Synod, and a homiletician and dogmatician of note. Yet Hoenecke s influence is more difficult to document than is the influence of the American Luther, C. F. W. Walther ( ). Hoenecke did not have Walther s energy, administrative abilities, or commanding personality. Unlike Walther, he preferred to work behind the scenes. His influence today is also difficult to assess because his theological writings are only slowly being made available in English translation. We offer this biographical study of Hoenecke and assessment of his influence in the hope of acquainting a wider audience with this Wisconsin Synod theological giant. We will consider his early life, his theological leadership in times of controversy, his seminary contributions, and theological writing to demonstrate the impact he had on the Wisconsin Synod and through this synod on the history of Lutheranism in America. Early Life Adolf Hoenecke was born in Brandenburg on February 25, 1835, to a family of nominal Christians. He was baptized and confirmed in the Evangelical Church (Prussian Union). His father was a rationalist and unbeliever. His mother taught him to pray, but did not seem to have had much of a religious influence on him. He attended the Gymnasium in Brandenburg. His older brothers entered the military, but Adolf did not have the physical stature or inclination for such a career. He had a strong interest in horticulture and had thought of pursuing a career as a botanist. The idea of studying for the ministry was suggested to him in a most unlikely way. Hoenecke had invited his unbelieving music teacher at the Gymnasium, whose son was a classmate, to an evening gathering following his final examination. A rather stout pastor from a neighboring town was there. As they discussed Adolf s future the music teacher slapped the portly pastor on the knee and said, Look, Adolf, become a pastor and you will have a good thing. He was later often a guest at the man s parsonage in Plane. For a young man who was in frail health, a more contemplative life with the promise of better health seemed appealing. A rather off-hand comment was the outward prompting for Hoenecke to pursue a degree in theology. 1 He enrolled at the University of Halle, but because he had not prepared for a degree in theology while at the Gymnasium and knew no Hebrew he enrolled as a student of philosophy. 1 August Pieper, The Significance of Dr. Adolf Hoenecke for the Wisconsin Synod and American Lutheranism. The Wauwatosa Theology, ed. By Curtis Jahn (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1997) vol. III, p

2 After twelve weeks of intensive study he was able to pass the examination in Hebrew and six months after matriculating became a theological student. 2 In Halle he came under the influence of Professor August Tholuck ( ), the chaplain and dean of the university. Tholuck was a mediating theologian in the Prussian Union, but inclined toward Lutheran doctrine 3 and an opponent of rationalism. He turned Halle from the rationalism which dominated since the philosopher, Christian Wolff ( ), had returned in triumph in 1740 after having previously been dismissed from the university faculty by the pietists. Tholuck initially faced ridicule from the German orientalist and Bible critic Wilhelm Gesenius ( ) and the rationalistic sytematician, Julius Wegscheider ( ). However, the rationalist spirit of the university faded under Tholuck s scholarship (he reportedly had a working knowledge of some nineteen languages) and winning personality. Tholuck had a profound impact on Hoenecke just as he had on many other students. The American church historian, Philip Schaff ( ), offers this firsthand description of the great professor at Halle: Next to Neander, no German divine of the present century is more extensively known in the Protestant churches of France, Holland, England, and America than Dr. Frederick Augustus Tholuck of Halle. His disciples are scattered over nearly the whole Protestant world, and gratefully remember his genial influence and personal attention. His name will always be honorably connected with the history of the revival of evangelical theology and piety in Germany... One of the most striking and lovely traits of his character is his attachment to students. He loves them like a father. He cannot live without them. He not only freely invites them to his house and table, but is almost invariably surrounded by two or three of them on the promenades which he is obliged to take for the benefit of his health, twice a day before dinner and supper in spite of rain and mud in muddy Halle. His free conversations in this peripatetic style are often more interesting and stirring than his lectures. 4 Tholuck brought Hoenecke to a saving knowledge of Christ and was generous to the financially destitute student (Hoenecke had to put himself through school). Adolf was evidently a frequent companion on Tholuck s walks and once offered this observation: Tholuck did all the talking when he took you on a walk, and at the parting thanked you for the interesting conversation. 5 Hoenecke evidently learned well from his teacher. Ludwig Fuerbringer makes a similar comment about Hoenecke. 6 2 Dr. Adolf Hoenecke Obituary, Gemeinde-Blatt; vol 43 #2 (January 15, 1908) p One source says that Tholuck s theology cannot be classed with any particular school. See The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, ed. by Samuel Macauley Jackson (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1977 reprint) vol. XI, p Others note that although he had pietistic and unionistic leanings, he was the spiritual son of Professor Johann Gottfried Schebel ( ), the leader of the Old Lutherans in Breslau, who gave Tholuck a strong Lutheran legacy. See August Pieper, The Significance of Dr. Adolf Hoenecke for the Wisconsin Synod and American Lutheranism. p Philip Schaff. Germany; Its Universities, Theology and Religion (Philadelphia: Lindsay and Blakiston, 1857) p. 278, J. P. Koehler, The History of the Wisconsin Synod (St. Cloud: Sentinel Publishing Co., for the Protes tant Conference, 1970) p Ludwig Fuerbringer. Persons and Events: Reminiscences of Ludwig Ernest Fuerbringer (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1947) p

3 At Halle Adolf also studied under the orientalist and Bible critic, Herman Hupfeld ( ), Julius Mueller ( ) who attacked David Struss s ( ) rationalistic Leben Jesu, and the solidly Lutheran, H. E. F. Guericke ( ). Because of their teaching styles and/or personalities, Hoenecke did not gravitate to any of them. Tholuck encouraged Adolf to study the Lutheran dogmaticisns from the Age of Orthodoxy, particularly Johann Quenstedt ( ) and Abraham Calov ( ). It appears that he was grooming him for a university teaching position. Since there was an oversupply of theological candidates in Germany at the time, many graduates sought employment as private tutors. Hoenecke served in this capacity for a few years for a wealthy family near Bern, Switzerland. There he had the time to continue his study of Lutheran dogmaticians. He was also able to observe Reformed church life up close. In Switzerland he became engaged to Mathilda Hess, the daughter of the Reformed pastor, Rudolph Hess. This connection, however, made him a more convinced Lutheran. He returned to Germany and attended the preachers seminary that was connected to the Luther School in Wittenberg to prepare for the pastoral ministry in Prussia. He took his examination for the ministry in Magdeburg and was ordained there. The Berlin Mission Society 7 had appealed to the Prussian government for candidates that might be sent to serve the German immigrants in America. 8 When Hoenecke volunteered for service in America, Tholuck broke off all relations with him because he did not approve of his protégé s decision. The Berlin Mission Society sponsored and underwrote Adolf s travel to the United States. Hoenecke came to America hoping to be a pastor of a congregation like he had so often visited in Plane. It also seems that through his study of the Lutheran dogmaticians he had become disenchanted with the Prussian Union. Hoenecke s early life is a testimony to the grace of God. He came from a rationalistic background and decided to pursue theology because of a humorous suggestion of an unbelieving teacher. At the University of Halle he came into contact with a mediating theologian who was instrumental in his becoming a Christian and a student of Lutheran theology. He spent time in Switzerland and eventually married the daughter of a Reformed pastor. This was the man that God thus prepared to become the theological leader of the Wisconsin Synod. The Wisconsin Synod in 1863 When Hoenecke arrived in Wisconsin in 1863, the Wisconsin Synod had already turned the corner toward a greater confessionalism. The Muehlhaeuser Synod of the early 1850s had been a new Lutheran synod, committed to the Lutheran confessions on paper but not necessarily in practice. The original constitution of the Wisconsin Synod required pastors to subscribe not only to the Unaltered Augsburg Confession but also to the Evangelical Lutheran Confessions. 9 However, Johannes Muehlaeuser ( ) and many of the pastors who 7 According to the Lutheran Cyclopedia, ed. by Erwin Lueker (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1975) the Berlin Missionary Society was organized by 10 men, including J. Neander and F. Tholuck. 8 Dr. Adolf Hoenecke Obituary, Gemeinde-Blatt; vol 43 #2 (January 15, 1908) p Wisconsin Synod Constitution, Article 5, par An English translation of the synod s first constitution by Dr. Arnold O. Lehmann can be found in the WELS Hist. Inst. Journal, vol. 22, #1, p The constitution is attached to the minutes of the 1850 convention. The minutes of the synod s conventions from 1849 to 1855 exist only in manuscript form. They were transcribed and published in volume XXXIX of the Northwestern College student magazine, the Black and Red. The WLS library contains copies of the transcriptions bound with the early Proceedings that were printed. 3

4 joined the synod he founded in 1850 had been trained by mission houses in Germany and sent by mission societies to America to serve Lutheran or Reformed or union congregations. They were opposed to the Methodists and other sects, but were cozy with the German Reformed. Muehlaeuser considered himself a Lutheran, but he lacked solid Lutheran training. However, the young Wisconsin Synod understood Lutheran doctrine enough to reject the Definite Platform and its American Recension of the Augsburg Confession 10 by synodical resolution in Resolved that the newly conceived so-called DEFINITE PLATFORM be categorically rejected by us, the Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Wisconsin, because the synod recognizes: 1. That the Unaltered Augsburg Confession is based upon the Word of God, and 2. That the adoption of the so-called Platform is nothing else but a definite suicide of the Lutheran Church. 11 Wisconsin s turn toward greater confessionalism began when Johannes Bading ( ) arrived in Wisconsin in He had received a solid Lutheran training from Ludwig Harms ( ) and the mission society he founded in Hermannsburg. Others also arrived in Wisconsin with a better Lutheran education than Muehlhaeuser had. Some of the unionistic mission houses could provide training that was much more Lutheran depending on who was the head of the institution at the time. Philipp Koehler ( ), the father of Wisconsin Synod historian and theologian, J.P. Koehler ( ), received such training. He arrived in Wisconsin in Bading was a natural leader who stood for confessional Lutheranism from the time he stepped on Wisconsin soil. Koehler was tireless in his efforts to improve the practice of the Wisconsin Synod. 12 When Muehlhaeuser stepped down as president of the synod in 1860, John Bading was elected to replace him. He was only thirty-six years old at the time. He used his office to move his synod to a firmer Lutheran position. In 1861 he asked Gottlieb Reim ( ) to present an essay at the convention that summer entitled, The Confessional Stand of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Wisconsin. 13 The essay marked another turning point in the history of the synod. Bading s president s reports to the synod in 1861 and 1862 urged the synod to establish a seminary of its own. He was evidently concerned with both the quantity and the quality of the of the pastors coming into the synod. The discussion on the floor in 1862 centered on the need for training pastors particularly because of the inroads of the Roman Catholics and the efforts of the Methodists and Albrechtsleute (a branch of German Methodism). A floor committee reported 10 The five errors eliminated from the Augsburg Confession by the American Lutherans in the American Recension of the Augsburg Confession included (1) the approval of the ceremonies of the mass; (2) private confession and absolution; (3) denial of the divine obligation of the Sabbath; (4) baptismal regeneration; (5) the real presence of the body and blood of our Savior in the Lord s Supper. The text of the Definite Synodical Platform with the American Recension of the Augsburg Confession is included in Richard C. Wolf, Documents of Lutheran Unity in America. (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1966) p Synodalversammlung der ev.-luth. Kirche von Wisconsin, 1856, p. 3. trans.by Dr. A. O. Lehmann in the WELS Historical Institute Journal, vol. 11, #1 (April 1993) p August Pieper, Anniversary Reflections, in The Wauwatosa Theology, edited by Curtis Jahn (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1997) vol. III, p Dr. A. O. Lehmann, who transcribed much of the early correspondence of the synod, echoes Pieper s evaluation. The correspondence shows the influence and consistency of Koehler. 13 Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin, p

5 that we urgently support the recommendation of the praesidium to establish a preacherseminary. 14 By 1863 it was not a matter of whether the synod would establish a seminary but where. Even though the country was embroiled in the Civil War (the Battle of Gettysburg would be fought about a month after the convention) the synod resolved to proceed. The debate between the advantages of locating the school in Milwaukee or Watertown seems to have pitted the influence of Muehlhaeuser against Bading. Koehler suggests that the decision to locate the seminary in Watertown was a victory for the Bading forces 15 and a sign of the growing confessionalism in Wisconsin. Hoenecke was present at this convention. Hoenecke had come to Wisconsin with the expectation of serving a congregation in La Crosse. When he arrived in February 1863 that congregation had already secured a pastor. He served in Racine for several months before being installed as a pastor in Farmington near Watertown, Wisconsin. In this small congregation, he had time to continue his study of Scripture, the Lutheran confessions, and the Lutheran dogmaticians. In these early years he was also growing in his understanding of the American Lutheran scene and what it meant to be a pastor in America. When his fiancée Mathilda arrived from Europe, John Bading performed the wedding. The Badings and the Hoeneckes became close, life-long friends. Hoenecke s Growing Influence Hoenecke s university training and considerable gifts were recognized by the synod early on. In 1864 he was elected secretary of the synod at the age of twenty-nine. 16 As secretary, he was tasked with writing to the mission societies to explain Wisconsin s handling of cases dealing with the Reformed. 17 The very next year the synod began publishing the Gemeinde-Blatt (first issue September 1, 1865), the synod s first official periodical. Eduard Moldehnke ( ) was chosen editor-in-chief. Hoenecke and Bading were appointed assistant editors. Moldehnke, also a graduate of the University of Halle, was the synod s Reiseprediger (traveling missionary). He was the man selected to be the first professor at Wisconsin s seminary. He tried to do both and it did not always work so well. He would take off during the school year to go on his missionary journeys. In the fall of 1865 Northwestern University (later Northwestern College) was founded to prepare students for the seminary. The two schools shared the same campus. Disciplinary problems and Moldehnke s absences prompted the synod to call Adolf to be inspector (dean of students) and theological professor in Moldehnke evidently took this as an affront and considered it a waste of money. He promptly resigned and within a year returned to Germany. 18 Later he came back to America and became a pastor in New York City and a prominent member of the New York Ministerium Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin, p ; WELS Historical Institute Journal, vol. 16, #1, p , Koehler, The History of the Wisconsin Synod. p Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin, p Koehler, The History of the Wisconsin Synod. p Koehler includes correspondence from the mission societies as well as correspondence from Philipp Koehler and opposition to the unionistic mission societies in the Northern Conference, p Erwin E. Kowalke, Centennial Story: Northwestern College, (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1965) p Lutheran Cyclopedia, ed. by Erwin Lueker (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1975) p

6 Hoenecke took Moldehnke s place as seminary professor and editor-in-chief of the Gemeinde-Blatt. As editor, he answered the accusations of the Missouri Synod over against Wisconsin s lax Lutheranism, many of which by then were anachronistic. 20 He also wrote articles on the Lutheran confessions and Christian doctrine in an attempt to lead the members of the Wisconsin Synod to a greater understanding of what it means to be Lutheran. He taught at the seminary until From the Wisconsin Synod had its future pastors trained under C. F. W. Walther and his colleagues at Missouri s seminary in St. Louis. Inter-Church Relations Under Muehlhaeuser s leadership, the Wisconsin Synod maintained connections with Lutherans in the East, particularly the Pennsylvania Ministerium which regularly sent financial support to Wisconsin. The General Synod s Gettysburg Seminary trained one pastor, Johann Sieker ( ), at no cost to Sieker or the Wisconsin Synod. 21 When the Pennsylvania Ministerium withdrew from the General Synod in 1866 because of the General Synod s lack of confessionalism, the stage was set for the founding of a new federation of more confessionally-minded Lutheran synods. Pennsylvania issued an invitation to all Lutheran synods in the United States and Canada which accepted the Augsburg Confession to meet to discuss the possibility of forming a truly Lutheran organization. Thirteen synods responded favorably, including the Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota synods. At the preliminary meeting in Reading, Pennsylvania, December 12-14, 1866, the eminent confessional theologian, Charles Porterfield Krauth ( ), delivered an essay in which he emphasized subscription not only to the Unaltered Augsburg Confession, but also to all of the Lutheran confessions contained in the Book of Concord. The delegates established a committee to prepare a constitution and elected officers. Wilhelm Streissguth ( ), the president of the Wisconsin Synod, 22 was elected German secretary. Three synods, Ohio, Iowa, and Missouri, were unwilling to join because they believed that complete doctrinal agreement had not yet been established among all of the participants. The General Council held its first regular convention in Fort Wayne, Indiana, November 20-26, Bading, Hoenecke, and Adam Martin ( ) were the Wisconsin Synod s delegates. The Ohio Synod sent delegates who were granted the right to debate even though they did not have right to vote. They had no right to vote because Ohio had not joined the Council. Ohio s delegates asked for clarification of the Council s theological position on four points: altar fellowship, pulpit fellowship, chiliasm, and secret societies. No doubt, Ohio was concerned about chiliasm because a prominent member of the delegation of the Pennsylvania Ministerium, Joseph Seiss ( ), was a well-known millennialist. Lodge membership was an issue in 20 Koehler offers an extended account of the exchanges between Missouri and Wisconsin. The History of the Wisconsin Synod. p Edward C. Fredrich, The Wisconsin Synod Lutherans. (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1992) p Sieker served the Wisconsin Synod in Granville, Wisconsin. He accepted a call into the Minnesota Synod and was elected president of that church body. He led Minnesota to become a founding member of the Synodical Conference. Later he accepted a call to St. Matthew s in New York City and led that historic congregation into the Missouri Synod. 22 Gottlieb Reim was elected president of the synod in 1864 during Bading s extended trip to Europe to collect money for the new seminary. Reim resigned in As vice-president Streissguth became acting president and was elected in his own right in 1866 with Bading as vice-president. In 1867 Streissguth stepped down and Bading was elected president once again. See Edward C. Fredrich, Two Forgotten Wisconsin Presidents: Reim and Streissguth, Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly, vol. 75, #3 (July 1976) p

7 many conservative church bodies of the day. Fellowship, whether altar or pulpit, was a key doctrine for all who wanted to be known as confessional Lutheran. The answers of the General Council to the four points at the Pittsburgh convention in 1868 were less than satisfactory to some of the synods. President Bading of Wisconsin, President Stephen Klingmann ( ) of Michigan, and President Reinhold Adelberg ( ) 23 of the New York Ministerium attempted to strengthen the statement adopted by the majority of the delegates. They finally withdrew their minority report, but asked that their faith and confession be made clear by having these statements recorded in the Proceedings of the General Council: In regard to the I point, we reject every form of Chiliasm as contrary to Scriptures and the Confessions. In regard to the II point, we declare that we consider secret societies, such as Free Masons. Odd Fellows, &c, as anti-christian and soul-endangering associations, and earnestly warn against them. In regard to the III and IV points, respecting Mixed Communion and Interchange of Pulpits, we designate such fellowship with those not Lutherans as a unionistic practice, dangerous for our Lutheran Church, and which we decidedly reject. 24 Prior to the General Council convention in 1868 the Wisconsin Synod had resolved to break with the Council if suitable answers to the Four Points were not forthcoming. 25 When Bading reported to the 1869 Wisconsin Synod convention the answers given to the Four Points by the General Council in 1868, Wisconsin found them unsatisfactory and withdrew from the Council. 26 Hoenecke was a prime mover behind this action. Hoenecke was also present for the colloquy between Missouri and Iowa in Milwaukee in He sided with Walther and his colleagues on the issue of Iowa s open questions. Koehler offers this account: More than sixty years ago the author heard the following reference to this colloquium, in the family circle of prominent members of Walther s city-wide parish, who associated much with him and the four associate pastors: After the close of the colloquium, when the gathering dispersed, some of the visitors heard a young man say to his companion: Walther no doubt is right in his stand against the Iowans, who really have no command of the whole subject in spite of the many things they do know. The listeners made inquiry and found out that the young man was Prof. Hoenecke of Watertown. When they reported to Walther, he 23 In 1869 Adelberg accepted a call to Northwestern in Watertown and later served as an English professor at the Wauwatosa seminary. Stephen Klingman died in 1891 before the Federation of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan became a reality. Klingman s son Julius served for many years as pastor of St. Mark s in Watertown, Wisconsin. 24 Proceedings, General Council of the Ev. Lutheran Church in America, 2 nd Convention, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, (November 12-18, 1868) p Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, P Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, P

8 answered: Yes, I have been taking note of him for some time. We may hope for much from him. 27 The 1867 convention of the Wisconsin Synod showed continued progress in the growth of confessionalism, but also showed that there was still unclarity in the thinking of some. The convention included discussions with representatives of the Iowa Synod concerning open questions. President Streissguth ( ), who stepped down from the presidency at this convention paving the way for Bading to be elected once again, had Iowa s Sigmund Fritschel ( ) preach for an evening convention service. According to the proceedings there was a division in the synod over the issues, but only two pastors are personally mentioned as favoring Iowa s opinion that chiliasm was an open question. 28 One of these two was the founder and first president of the Wisconsin Synod, John Muehlhaeuser. His pietistic background can be seen in his response to statements on chiliasm by the Iowa representatives. The minutes record that he cited a saying of Bengel You chiliasts can subscribe to the confessions with a good conscience. The 1000-year reign is not in the Augustana, but it is in the Bible. 29 However, the minutes conclude, So we still do not teach or preach from the pulpit the millennium. 30 Hoenecke published this article on the discussions: In view of the importance of the whole matter. It is only regrettable that our convention was not prepared to a degree desirable to deliberate on it, and for that reason the discussions have resulted in no conclusion worth mentioning. That will make it all the more necessary at our next synodical convention to take up the subject again and deal with it in a thorough fashion. Until then let all weigh very seriously the anxious question whether perhaps now again, as happened once before in a somewhat similar way, the Open Questions could become the door through which enemies who might not be easy to overcome might force their way into our Lutheran Zion. 31 Hoenecke s work behind the scenes was undoubtedly the major reason the synod did not drift closer to Iowa. During that same convention, the synod went on record concerning the Prussian Union. Hoenecke chaired the floor committee that tackled the issue. He and the majority of the committee brought resolutions that condemned not only manufactured unions between two church bodies but also those unions that are forced by the power of the government. Dr. Theodor Meumann (d. 1885) brought in a minority report which was adopted instead of the resolutions offered by Hoenecke and the committee majority. It seems as if many in the synod, 27 Koehler, The History of the Wisconsin Synod. p Koehler undoubtedly heard this conversation during his student days at the seminary in St. Louis in the late 1870s. It evidently made a lasting impression on him. 28 For a brief account of this meeting see Koehler, The History of the Wisconsin Synod, p Iowa considered the doctrine of the Antichrist, the doctrine of the ministry, millennialism, the total conversion of the Jews, the first resurrection in Revelation 20, and Sunday observance to be open questions, doctrines on which two church bodies could disagree without it be divisive of fellowship. 29 Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p Gemeinde-Blatt (August 15, 1867) p. 3. English translation in Pieper, The Significance of Adolf Hoenecke for the Wisconsin Synod and American Lutheranism, p

9 while deploring unionism, did not want to appear ungrateful for all the assistance the mission societies had provided. The convention adopted resolutions condemning all doctrinal unionism and declaring that they aligned themselves with those in Europe who wanted to see the forced union between Lutherans and the Reformed annulled. The resolutions, however, attempted to justify receiving money and men from the mission societies. It was noted that there were still confessional Lutherans within the state churches who protested against the union that the government had imposed on them. So long as these groups remained confessional and protested against the union, it was possible to accept their aid with thanks. The mission societies were the agencies through which such help from these confessional Lutherans came to the synod. The printed proceedings include both the majority and the minority reports and a description of the debate. 32 The mission societies reacted sharply to Wisconsin s resolutions. For some time, they had been concerned about the theological direction of the synod. They saw the resolutions as a slap in their face. They accused the Wisconsin Synod of ingratitude and casting aside former friends for the sake of new friends (a veiled reference to the Missouri Synod). The synod convention in Racine in 1868 marked an important turning point in the history of the synod for several reasons. In his president s report Bading stated that the time for a break with the unionistic mission societies had come. The synod s prior vacillation between its love for confessional Lutheranism and its gratitude toward the societies for all of the help they had given made it difficult for anyone to understand the position of the synod. Following Bading s lead the synod broke with the societies while expressing thanks for all the help given by them to the synod up until that time. 33 Secondly, the convention, as previously noted, took a stand on the Four Points under discussion in the General Council and resolved to break with the Council if satisfactory answers on the Four Points were not given. The synod broke with the General Council in Finally, the Racine convention directed President Bading to initiate discussions with the Missouri Synod not only to address problems between the parishes of the two synods, but also in the hope of establishing brotherly relations. Wisconsin saw no church divisive differences between the two synods. Hoenecke and Pastor Lange protested the inclusion of the expression church divisive differences because it implied that there might be doctrinal differences that are not divisive of fellowship. The resolution was passed over their objections. 34 Discussions with Missouri proceeded rapidly and with great success. After the convention s close Bading traveled to Milwaukee to present the resolutions to Missouri s Northern District which was then meeting in convention. Walther was present and suggested that the committee to be appointed by the Northern District should represent the whole Missouri Synod. The meeting between Wisconsin and Missouri took place on October 21-22, 1868, in Milwaukee. Hoenecke was the theological leader of the Wisconsin delegation. 35 The two sides discussed all of the 32 Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p Wisconsin was represented by Bading, Hoenecke, Ph. Koehler, W. Dammann, and Carl Gausewitz. The Missouri delegation included, Walther, Prof. Brauer, F. Lochner, F. Sievers, and C. Strassen. Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p

10 doctrinal questions at issue among Lutherans of that day. 36 The discussion demonstrated complete doctrinal unity to the joy of all the participants. Walther, who had been a sharp critic of Wisconsin, showed himself to be a man of Christian humility and integrity by writing in the November 1 edition of Der Lutheraner, All of our reservations about the dear Wisconsin Synod have not only faded but have been put to shame. God be thanked for his inexpressible gift! 37 Koehler reports that Walther closed the meeting with Wisconsin with this declaration, Brethren, if we had known before what we know now we might have declared our unity of faith ten years ago. 38 In May 1869, the two synods worked out a reciprocal worker training agreement. Wisconsin was to close its seminary, transfer its students to Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, and supply a professor. Missouri s students in Wisconsin would attend Northwestern in Watertown and Missouri would supply a professor to that institution. Later that year both synods in convention ratified the agreement and the mutual recognition of orthodoxy. 39 The Missouri Synod s Frederick Stellhorn ( ) served at Northwestern from 1869 to Stellhorn later opposed Walther and Hoenecke during the Election Controversy. The Wisconsin Synod was not able to supply a professor for St. Louis. Hoenecke was called but declined. Several reasons have been suggested. One writer has claimed that doctors had forbidden him to accept the position because of his health. 40 Koehler cites a letter that Hoenecke wrote to Bading while he was struggling with the call, expressing a concern for the future of the Wisconsin Synod s educational system and the direction of the new educational leadership in Watertown. Koehler also mentions that the synod s board of trustees encouraged Hoenecke to accept a call into the parish because of the financial difficulties in the synod. They did not think that Wisconsin could afford to pay his salary in St. Louis. 41 August Pieper ( ) writes, He [Hoenecke] felt on the one hand, that his working together with Walther might be a threat to the peace of the church. On the other hand, the Wisconsin Synod was almost bankrupt and did not venture to raise money for the professorship in St. Louis while the school in Watertown [Northwestern College] was in dire financial straits. 42 Hoenecke s obituary mentions the financial problems of the synod as the reason he couldn t accept the call. 43 Ludwig Fuerbringer reports, I have it on good authority in fact, from his own statement many years later that Hoenecke, who was not in favor of the one seminary plan, was not inclined to teach in St Louis at the side of Walther, and, having known both men, I can very well understand his position. 44 According to oral tradition in the Wisconsin Synod, Hoenecke greatly admired Walther but believed it would be difficult for the two of them to work together because of the striking differences in their personalities. 36 Missouri s statement on open questions was discussed. Individual doctrines included the doctrine of church and ministry, ordination, inspiration, fellowship, the symbols, millennialism, and the Antichrist. Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p Der Lutheraner, Nov.1, 1868, Koehler, The History of the Wisconsin Synod, p Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.-Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, p , Harold E. Wicke, A Biography of Adolph Hoenecke. WELS Historical Institute Journal. Vol. 31 #1 p. 23. Wicke does not offer any documentation for this claim. 41 Koehler, The History of the Wisconsin Synod, p Pieper, Anniversary Reflections, p Dr. Adolf Hoenecke Obituary, Gemeinde-Blatt; vol 43 #2 (January 15, 1908) p Fuerbringer, Persons and Events. p

11 Hoenecke soon accepted a call to St. Matthew s in Milwaukee. From 1870 to 1878 while the Missouri Synod was providing seminary training for Wisconsin Synod students it was clear that the Wisconsin Synod looked to Hoenecke as its premier theologian. He was the essayist at seven of the nine synod conventions. Synodical Conference 45 Wisconsin s fellowship with Missouri was part of a growing confessional movement among Midwestern Lutherans. The Norwegian Synod, founded in 1853, had been in fellowship with the Missouri Synod and had a working arrangement for the training of Norwegian Synod students at Missouri s St. Louis Seminary since The Ohio Synod, founded in 1818, had grown more confessional through the immigration of German Lutherans who were pouring into the region. Ohio and Missouri met in colloquy in 1869 and found that they were in complete doctrinal agreement. The Illinois Synod sought closer ties with the Missouri Synod between 1868 and Fellowship was declared in Minnesota s withdrawal from the General Council in 1871 led to fellowship with Wisconsin. Missouri s representatives recognized unity of faith at a meeting with Minnesota representatives in January 1872, which led to a declaration of fellowship that same year. The stage was set for the founding of a new organization of confessional Lutherans. In June 1870, the Eastern District of the Ohio Synod in convention urged the Ohio Synod to take steps toward establishing cooperative activities with the Missouri Synod, particularly in educational institutions. That October Ohio s President Matthias Loy ( ) recommended to his synod that steps be taken towards effecting a proper understanding between the Synods of Missouri, of Wisconsin, of Illinois, and our own Synod, which all occupy substantially the same position, and arranging a plan of cooperation in the work of the Lord. 46 The convention appointed a committee to approach the officers of the other synods and the Norwegian Synod to ask whether such joint work might be undertaken. A preliminary meeting was held January 11-13, 1871, at a Missouri Synod church in Chicago. Representatives from the Missouri, Ohio, Wisconsin, and Norwegian synods attended. The president of the Illinois Synod 47 was present but did not actively participate because his synod was still a member of the General Council. The representatives drafted a constitution for consideration and adoption by their respective synods. They also considered a proposal to provide a single seminary for the various synods by moving Ohio s Columbus seminary to St. Louis as the Wisconsin Synod had recently done with its seminary program. Ohio was to move its college to Pittsburgh with Missouri s support and participation. The delegates scheduled a second preliminary meeting for November and extended invitations to all pastors and teachers of the participating synods to attend. When the November meeting convened at Pastor Wilhelm Sihler s ( ) St. Paul s Church in Fort Wayne, representatives of the Minnesota and Illinois synods were also present. Both of these synods had recently left the General Council for confessional reasons. The 45 For an overview of the background and founding of the Synodical Conference see Armin Schuetze, Synodical Conference: Ecumenical Endeavor (Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 2000) p Quoted in Schuetze, The Synodical Conference, p The Illinois Synod was formed in 1846 when the Synod of the West divided. In 1848 Illinois joined the General Synod. In 1867 Illinois left the General Synod to join the General Council. In May 1880, the Illinois synod merged with the Illinois District of the Missouri Synod. 11

12 proposed constitution with a few minor changes was to be presented to the constituent synods for approval as the basis for the formation of the Synodical Conference. The first convention of the Synodical Conference was held at Bading s Church, St. John s in Milwaukee, July 10-16, One hundred thirty-six pastors, professors, teachers, and laymen assembled. Of these sixty were voting delegates chosen by the individual synods according to the provisions of the proposed constitution. Walther delivered the sermon at the opening service. He was also elected the first president. The constitution, which had been approved by all six synods, committed the members of the Synodical Conference to the canonical writings of the Old and New Testaments, and the confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of 1580, called the Concordia. The purpose of the conference was to express outwardly the unity of the respective synods, to strengthen one another in faith and confession, to promote unity in doctrine and practice, and eliminate any actual or threatening disturbances of the same. Two other aims were never accomplished: 1) to strive toward fixing territorial boundaries of the synods, providing that language does not separate them; 2) to unite all Lutheran Synods of America into one orthodox American Lutheran Church. 48 One of the purposes of the Synodical Conference was to try to eliminate problems between its member synods and their congregations. Such problems had occurred over the years because the various Lutheran synods had congregations in the same geographical areas. Members of one congregation at times joined the congregation of another synod for less than sanctified reasons. Congregations did not always honor the church discipline carried out by another synod s congregation. One of the aims was the endeavor to fix the limits of synods according to territorial boundaries in order to deal more effectively with these inter-congregational problems. Another aim was the consolidation of all Lutheran synods of America into a single, faithful, devout American Lutheran Church. At three of the earliest conventions of the Synodical Conference delegates considered Theses about Parish Rights (Jus Parochiale) which contended that parishes and congregations should have geographical boundaries and their own territory. Pres. Johann Sieker ( ) of the Minnesota Synod had been assigned a paper for the 1875 convention with the purpose of setting up rules for the merging of congregations existing in the same geographical area and determining their synodical affiliation. Because of the press of his duties Sieker was unable to carry out his assignment, but recommended to the 1875 convention that it might be time for the merging of the synods into state synods. The Conference established a committee to present proposals to the next convention to determine how this might be done. The committee concluded that the only way to eliminate the evils that existed among the rival German congregations was to merge all the German synods of the Synodical Conference into one church body. This body would divide itself into district or state synods. The proposal was voted down because it was seen as impractical, obstructive, and not feasible. A resolution, however, was passed to advise all our synods without delay to take steps to bring state synods into being, even if this does not happen everywhere at the same time, yet in any case where it can be done without difficulty, detriment, and disadvantage. A resolution also was passed to to establish one joint seminary and place this under the control of the Synodical Conference. A final resolution stated, Until the dissolution of the larger synodical bodies has 48 Schuetze, The Synodical Conference. p

13 taken place, it should be left up to the respective state synods whether they wished to join one of the existing general synods. 49 The reaction of the various synods was mixed. Wisconsin did not reject the original plan for independent state synods, but objected to the proposal that Wisconsin would have to attach itself to Missouri as a district. Wisconsin s resolutions on the state synod proposal provoked resentment and condemnation by Missouri Synod representatives. Wisconsin declared: 1. The synod endorses and heartily approves the original plan to unite all orthodox Lutherans within the Synodical Conference into individual, independent state synods. 2. The synod asserts that it is ready for such an amalgamation into a state synod of Wisconsin as soon as the possibility is precluded that this state synod might as a district attach itself to an existing synod and thereby lose it separate identity and independence. 3. The synod asserts that it cannot view any such attachment to an existing general synod either as commanded in God s Word or as essentially necessary for true unity and profitable and advantageous for our congregations. 50 A final resolution turned down the proposal for establishing a joint seminary and committed Wisconsin to re-open its own seminary. The synod believed that it was losing candidates for the ministry because there was no opportunity for training them in Wisconsin. The Missouri Synod visitors at Wisconsin s convention in 1877 expressed their disapproval of Wisconsin s resolutions and the discussions they heard. They questioned what they perceived as a fear of the Missouri Synod and the implication that such a merger was evil. Some questioned Wisconsin s doctrine and practice because the synod did not want to become part of the Missouri Synod. Hoenecke and Bading were among those who responded for Wisconsin. It is sad, he [Hoenecke] said, that in the wish to remain independent and accordingly to have a seminary, one suspects a hidden aversion to Missouri and to sound doctrine. That is not a necessary conclusion. We have for so long been independent and want to remain so. Isn t a friendly relationship enough. No, it is said, you must also joyfully merge with our synod. President Bading finally closed the debate. If we here speak as we do in favor of independence, one should remember that we Wisconsinites also have a 27-year past behind us. It is not fear of Missouri but love for our own synod... Neither fear nor difference is at the bottom of this, but simply the wish to remain independent. 51 The synod re-opened its own seminary in Milwaukee in Hoenecke was called to teach dogmatics, homiletics, pastoral theology, and ethics. He also gave a series of exegetical lectures on St. Paul s Letter to the Romans. 52 Bading and Hoenecke had led the opposition to the state synod plan. Although there were more efforts within the Synodical Conference to proceed with the state synod plan, within a few 49 Schuetze, The Synodical Conference. p Synodical Conference Proceedings, p. 41. See Verhandlungen der Verssamlung der Deutschen Evangel.- Lutherischen Synode von Wisconsin und anderen Staaten, 1877, p Schuetze, The Synodical Conference. p Dr. Adolf Hoenecke Obituary, Gemeinde-Blatt; vol 43 #2 (January 15, 1908) p

14 years the project was dead. A bigger controversy involving the doctrine of election began to tear the Synodical Conference apart. Whereas the State Synod Controversy had caused hard feelings between Missouri and Wisconsin, the Election Controversy brought the two synods closer together. 53 For a number of years Walther had been presenting essays before the conventions of the Western District of the Missouri Synod on the general topic: The Doctrine of the Lutheran Church Alone Gives All Glory to God An Irrefutable Proof that Its Doctrine is the Only True Doctrine. At the Altenburg, Missouri, convention, in 1877, he discussed the doctrine of predestination on the basis of the Formula of Concord. Walther suggested that speaking of election intuitu fidei (in view of faith) was open to misunderstanding and should be avoided. Gerhard says that God has chosen us in view of faith. Others have expressed themselves contrary to this mode of expression, saying that if this [expression] is used, it behooves us to explain it more carefully. Should it have the meaning that faith is the moving cause? This cannot be acceptable. If one thereby wishes to say that God has chosen no one who does not come to faith, this is correct. Then it is a description of the elect, except that faith is not the cause of election. The cause is Christ alone. Had He not become man, no one could have been chosen, because God can forgive no sins for which there has not been an atonement. He is the righteous judge; He does not declare the guilty free unless the debt is paid. Each must have paid his debt of sin before he can be declared free. Since we cannot do this of ourselves, God must accomplish this for us. This is the reason or cause why God is able to save us, why he could choose us from eternity. 54 In January of 1879 Friedrich Schmidt ( ), who had been a student of Walther s and his colleague for a time as the Norwegian Synod s professor at St. Louis, took exception to Walther s essay. He soon was supported by Missouri Synod pastors Frederick Stellhorn and Henry Allwardt ( ). In January of 1880, Schmidt began publishing Altes und Neues, a monthly periodical, in which he attacked Walther. A special Missouri Synod pastoral conference in Chicago, Sep 29 to Oct 5, 1880, attended by more than 500 pastors, did not completely resolve the problems. The controversy spread throughout the Synodical Conference. In January of 1881, there was a meeting of all the faculties of the Synodical Conference in Milwaukee, but no agreement was reached. The Ohio Synod representatives left after five days. The Ohio Synod publicly aligned itself with Schmidt in February 1881, by publishing The Columbus Theological Magazine, which contained articles on predestination opposing the doctrinal position of Missouri. In September of 1881 the Ohio Synod voted to withdraw from the Synodical Conference and voted to accept men leaving Missouri because of the doctrine of election. The convention defended election intuitu fidei. In June 1882, fourteen pastors left Ohio and formed the Concordia Synod of Pennsylvania. This body eventually merged with the Missouri Synod. Hoenecke led the Wisconsin Synod to side with Walther. As the controversy intensified, Wisconsin s pastoral conference in 1879 raised some objections to certain statements of Walther that appeared to be open to misunderstanding. The conference asked Walther to explain or 53 For an overview of the Election Controversy see Schuetze, The Synodical Conference. p C.F.W. Walther, Predestination I, in Essays for the Church, (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1992), vol. II, p