Three score and ten years ago the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, or as it was known at that time, The German Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri, Ohio and Other States, adopted as binding document of its faith a small collection of doctrinal statements, published in a slim volume - I have it here - under the humble name of Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod, generally simply known as the Brief Statement. As certainly some of you will realize the document got this name to lead thoughts and associations to the Christian Book of Concord and that which there is called Epitome articulorum or Summar-ischer Begriff a condensed re-statement if the Formula of Concord, in other words: a “brief statement”. The Brief Statement of 1932, thus, was aimed at keeping concordia, Eintracht, the unity of confession within the Missouri Synod. Inevitably, I dare say, now some of you will raise internal protest and wonder: So why should we care about a wee booklet issued in the prehistoric year 1932? We all know anyway that really nothing of any importance happened in America before 1950. And secondly: why bother about the Missouri Synod, of all, have we not enough to be concerned about anyway? Well, to mount the horse by its tail: the Missouri Synod actually is the standard, norm and measure according to which all of American Lutheranism is measured and actually measures itself, for better for worse. Doctrinally speaking one is either as Missouri, or more liberal than Missouri, or indeed a bit more strict than even Missouri. And not only this: thanks to its fairly strict organization, strong internal cohesion and uniform front presented to the world, the devil and all his adherents, Missouri perhaps earlier and certain-ly much more in relief and acute sharpness displays whatever it is that ails or troubles American Lutheranism as such. What in other synods is but a discreet murmur in the background, whisper in shameful corridors, or carefully camouflaged public secret, in Missouri tends to stand out as a big red pimple for all to see: there it is, o Schreck! It is the miner’s little bird that indicates danger in the air. And finally: the push behind the creation of the ELCA in no little measure came from Missouri, was in much directly born out of Missouri’s troubles and miseries. This Brief Statement, which for all I know still is in effect and normative for Missouri Synod Christians, and certainly not only for them - I for one have signed it - is among the 1st serious indicators that something just is not right, because it states what really should not need to be re-stated amongst good and faithful Lutherans. It also is the work and testament of a dying man who feared what might lie ahead for his beloved synod, Franz Pieper, Missouri Synod doctrinal theologian par excellence. He had noticed those little discreet indicators that seemed to tell him something might be on its way going awry, and you better stem the beginnings, or else. I do not know what exactly it was that originally triggered the warning signals in his mind, but there was for instance that little liturgical society St Stephen (or whatever it was called), that already during the 1920s began toying with that mediaeval plunder and mumbo-jumbo that forever seems to fascinate certain of my colleagues. It was, of course they would assure us, crossing their hearts, all and ab-so-lu-te-ly within proper confessional bounds, blah, blah, blah, and maybe they even be-lieved what they were saying, but as Prof. Olson certainly will agree: it is in the field of liturgics that the keen-eyed observer will spy the first tell-tale signs that something is going on in the area of doctrine and teaching.
Another field of concern had to do with the decline in the use of the German language in synod, actually not as the natural process of assimilation and general Americanization of Missouri Lutherans but rather brutally forced upon them by the anti- everything German mob-mentality of World War One, and interestingly enough way beyond armistice, well into the 1920s. The change over to English, however, represents a danger, namely the loss of essential doctrinal clarity and un-ambiguity, for the simple reason that whatever is easy to state clearly in German is as easy to muddle in English, even without necessarily intending so to do. Just compare, if you will, the term “Gottes-dienst”, focused on God, with its English equivalent “worship” that does not even mention God, or “Predigtamt”, the duty and obligation to preach the Word of God, with “the office of ministry” - and you will realize the potential for mischief is well-nigh unlimited.
With these and other concerns in mind, and knowing he soon would not be available to say whatever might be necessary to say, a dying Dr. Pieper devised this little book. He did not live to see it adopted. It did, however, appear to work as intended, until at least the 2nd catastrophe hit US Lutheranism, namely World War Two. Not really co-incidentally there was already in 1945 an outbreak of protest against the Brief Statement: it was suppressed but not overcome, instead festering beneath the surface. While the anti-German hysteria was largely absent, or at least not as pronounced and as prolonged as after 1917, it did mean another step towards the demise of German as language of learned theological discourse within Missouri, and consequently accelerated muddling of doctrinal waters. These are the years when German-speaking parents in concern about the future made a conscious effort hindering their children learning the language - much to the regret of these their children to-day. To put it in simple and admittedly simplified words: crises in Missouri and decline of the German are closely related. To-day but little is left of German there, and to-day but little is left of Missouri Synod as it used to be and as it used to see itself4 But the years directly after 1945 in other ways were filled with renewed energy and ambition, and part of that was helping fellow Lutherans dwelling in the basements of their bombed-out houses, hoping for a wee packet from the brethren on the other side of the Atlantic, coffee and flour, instead of stick-bombs and blockbusters. And no doubt there also was some solid theological reconstruction necessary, so Missouri potentates re-connected to their corresponding Bonzen on the German side, the American benefactors apparently really never realizing that their German counterparts actually were running in circles round them, theologically speaking, slowly infecting with strange notions the wise guys from St Louis, and that much which was labeled lutherisch actually had nothing at all to do with Luther. Just as a little example, to wit: To this very day most Americans are convinced that Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a Lutheran, in fact it quite recently was suggested that the House of Studies being planned should be named after Bonhoeffer, until that is, some guy partial to wearing silly white tabs round his neck pointed out that Bonhoeffer, whatever his virtues, was no Lutheran - never was. But he did have a compatriot who actually was, and strictly so, a man that also was a rarity inasmuch that he coolly and openly defied the Nazi church movement, refused to become entangled in any of its many webs, and in 1945 stood in an impeccably white shirt, and you’d have to make a very thorough search indeed amongst German theological scholars of that day and time to find another of his kind. And he was not even dead ! Hermann Sasse is his name, and soon enough he felt rather uncomfortable among his quickly de-nazified colleagues, and he emphatically did not wish to be part of the accelerating un-lutheranisation of whatever was left of German Lutheranism. But salvation was at hand: America beckoned, and Missouri of course and most obviously was the natural and god-given harbor for such a man, ardent Lutheran, scholar of vast and excellent learning, in short: exactly what Missouri needed - and Missouri is what he needed. He was politely received, showered with Big Words, and quickly dispatched out of sight and hearing, and as the Bikini and Eniwetok atolls were needed for other urgent purposes, Australia was unto where he was deposed of, to kangaroos and billabongs, and Mathilda waltzing forever. As a flash in a dark night the treatment of Dr. Sasse shows us what actually was going on in Missouri in the late 1940s: Lutheranism yes, sure, but already not too much of it - kind of ”go easy on the mustard Lutheranism”. In retrospect it seems clear that the leadership in St Louis had decided on toning down the taken for granted Missouri position, instead discreetly moving towards a cautiously more ecumenical direction. Now, if that is going on with the green tree, what might be happening else in American Lutheranism? Some of you might find it highly interesting checking out what at that time was going on the Swedish Augustana Synod, if you need a hint. No wonder then that the 1950s came with Cold War and a general desire to be 105 % American, and absolutely less German, and the first little synods in protest peeling off Missouri like skin in too much of a Sun. Does any-one here still recall the Orthodox Lutheran Church? But the climate seemed good for some Lutheran re-alignment, for instance between Missouri and the ALC. Not that this ALC was really kosher. But the confessional Lutherans within it hoped to gain strength from Missouri, and the liberal Lutherans within it hoped to align themselves with the up and coming liberal Missourians, who in their turn certainly welcomed some potential ALC support, and Missouri especially at the grassroots level as such imaged it could inject some good solid confessional Lutheranism into the ALC and therefore was willing to speak softly. After all, it had worked, and worked exceedingly well with the Wisconsin Synod, which started out as a quite liberal not to say confused agglomeration of vaguely Lutheran congregations but through skilful handling had been won over to the strict confessional side. Alas, that was many years ago, and meanwhile Missouri had lost its big stick. And more than that. Deliberations between the twain dragged on, and on, to the rising consternation and growing exasperation of Missouri’s partners, the Wisconsin Synod and The Evangelical Lutheran Synod. They tried to coax their much bigger partner back onto the road of what they saw as orthodoxy, but to no avail. The only thing that happened was growing dissent within the WELS and the ELS, pastors and laymen demanding louder and louder that their church leadership draw the consequences and break off relations with St Louis. “Mark and avoid”, as such is called. But already at that time the thought of for the sake of proper doctrine cutting off established church relationships seemed brutal, so the leadership of respective synod dragged their feet, talking of old debts of gratitude and such, for auld lang syne. Certainly there also had been established a great many bonds of friendship and family relationships between the synods of the Synodical Conference, and it is understandable that this caused hesitation and anguish, and pious hopes of things somehow sorting Out themselves, with faces being saved all around.
“Admonition until proven to be of no avail”, was the official position, providing - of course - lots of leeway. The eventual result of the ongoing and deepening mess was that nothing came out of the ALC - Missouri wedding, that WELS and ELS lost several thousand members lay as well as clergy which formed the Church of the Lutheran Confession, and that eventually both ELS and WELS had to break off formal relations to Missouri, mainly perhaps in order to save their own ships. This was a disaster but not one to deter the modernizing forces within Missouri; they kept digging but discreetly, playing for time, watching how in other Lutheran synods doctrine rather quickly gave way to expediency and the not always acknowledged but certainly implied desire of the synodical leadership to catch up with other denominations and enter the promised land of the American Mainstream. It meant watering down doctrine to “tradition”, something like squaredancing or Halloween, and resolutely killing off surviving ethnic enclaves within their respective synods. Suffer me to give you two quick snapshots, vignettes as it were, of what was going on within American Lutheranism at that time.
I think it was in 1968; I was working on a rather ambitious paper for my Masters degree at the Royal University of Uppsala Sweden; knowing practically nothing of the topic, I had decided to write on the History of Lutheranism n South America, in the pious but as it turned out very unrealistic assumption there would not be too much to write about, thus making for a comfortably brief paper. Just as an aside: I ended with more than 250 pages, I recall. Anyway, in course of my research I wrote the Mission Department in St. Louis, asking them for information on their South American endeavors, and they very kindly obliged, sending me a nice fat package of mission outreach materials. The more I read, the more bewildered nay shocked I became: it really sounded pretty much as the stuff churned out by the Church of Sweden mission department, right where I was in Uppsala; there were e g Mission Affirmations that seemed like something copied from the Lutheran World Federation. And this is the famous Missouri Synod, I wondered, paragon of true doctrine and teaching?! It really was an eye-opener. The reality behind it was that the LC-MS mission department for its abroad activities sort of had anticipated the moves the main body was supposed to take at some later occasion.
In 1980 my wife and I for the 1St time came to the US, as tourists, traveling through the Midwest, as comes naturally to people of our background. We were especially interested in visiting the old Swedish settlements, and of course would go to church on Sunday mornings. These were former Augustana synod congregations, now of course part of the Lutheran Church in America, LCA. We found as a rule of thumb that the older members, let’s say those in their 50’s and on, still were able to converse in Swedish, but that their pastors knew no Swedish, knew nothing about Swedish history and culture, and could not care less. Yes, there were exceptions - e g Center City and Lindstrom come to mind, but they just reinforced the rule. I well recall the little church in Sveadal, a little bit SW of the Twin Cities, with a small lovingly furnished church museum. You know, the usual things: fading photos of the humble beginnings, hymnals and Bibles and Small Catechisms brought over by the original settler, and so forth, quite moving in all simplicity. The pastor confessed not really knowing what this all is, and generally described it as a “collection of some old stuff and such”. I ventured asking him whether he knew what “Sveadal” means, in English ? He had not the faintest idea, and yet had been there a couple of years.(“Sveadal” means “Valley of the Swedes”).
My wife and I at that time knew very little about what is going on in American Lutheranism, but we could not but conclude that somehow and for some reason we were unable to fathom there was being made a deliberate effort killing off the roots reaching into the past. We had seen and concluded right. Tracks were being laid into the future, and this future demanded burning bridges back into time.
But before that of course there came the famous Big Bang in St Louis, the effort somehow to turn back synod to what it had been and had confessed during the times of Franz Pieper, to bring back into consciousness and force as it were the Brief Statement. It certainly is not coincidental that some of the main players here came out of the ELS, namely the Brothers Preus. It was an effort re-injecting into Missouri some of its own good blood. Now we know how this turned out. In retrospect one has to say that while the Missouri Synod as a consequence suffered the exodus of 100,000 members, these were about 100,000 members too few - they instead went underground, keeping smiling and biding their time. Those that follow developments and events within Missouri know that their time now has come, or so at least they think. Franz Pieper would not be astonished to learn that the trouble comes mainly from the English District. However, as a direct result of the Big Bang American Lutheranism was blessed with a new synod, now of fairly impressive size, the AELC, former Missourians of a liberal bent in combination with Romish liturgics suddenly finding themselves in a denomination of their own, but not really enjoying themselves too much. Once the glory of that exodus had faded they did not really know what to do with themselves. It appears that from the outset the program of their leadership was to overcome their own rather peculiar situation by being the agent bringing together the LCA and the ALC into a new, very much American and not at least really big denomination with a determinedly social agenda: the eventual result was the ELCA of to-day. The leaven here, in other words, was a theologically and not at least liturgically highly troubled not to say confused break-out element of the Missouri Synod, a Missourian carrying gifts one might be tempted to say, and one should not be astonished that the result of getting mixed with LCA and ALC flour turned out to be what we know as the ELCA. One should perhaps recall that “Lutheran” in Evangelical Lutheran Church in America managed to squeeze in there just barely by majority vote; I seem to recall that “Evangelical Catholic” was a strongly favored alternative. One also needs to recall that several matters of great pitch and moment were left unresolved in the discussions leading to union, not at least the matter of ministry. At that time this was seen as rather peculiar an omission, but as Swedes would say to-day one is inclined to see it as an event that rather looks like a thought. The agreement with the Episcopalians could be seen as a direct result. Which brings me to another personal vignette: in due order I had to seek membership in the ELCA when I desired to accept the call to Old Zion Lutheran Church. This was in late 1988, and I was far from enthusiastic, as I well knew what to expect of the ELCA, theologically speaking. However, I made what you might call a rational and reasonable assumption, namely that the new church body would be busy settling down, organizing itse1f~ creating co-ordination and harmony, and generally giving its members time to adjust to the new situation and adopt unity of purpose and outlook;
I figured it might take at least ten years to achieve this, and only then one would begin moving into the directions the tracks of which clearly had been laid at inception. Nice thinking from my part, but as Swedes are wont to note “It is difficult to prophesy, especially con-cerning the future”; in retrospect I understand how much I under-estimated the sheer determination of those that are driving the ELCA. The plain fact is that they started their radical program right in 1988, and have been pursuing it ever since with great skill, pitch and moment. Sure, has been the occasional set-back, both in matters of ecumenism and the radical sexual program, but these were easily overcome by skilful manipulation of the ELCA system, much aided by the increasing apathy and listlessness of the grass-roots mem-bership. We now have reached the point where you as an ELCAite either do, think and believe as told, because you are so told, or get out. It is quite fascinating to study bow carefully and with real long-range vision and determination the agreement with the Episcopalians was pursued, likely beginning already before the ELCA was a concept. When “presidents” were turned into “bishops”, in the LCA as well as in the ALC and the AELC, the course leading into to-day’s situation in fact was decided: this is not a new insight, however, there were already at that time sharp-eyed observers that understood and pro-tested the consequences of what was labeled “just a change of desig-nation”. Horse feathers: but the majority bought it, and still does. And while the minority - and honestly it is a very very small one - still is busy and up in arms on account of the agreement with the corrupt Episcopalians, the ELCA leadership already has left this way behind themselves and are energetically striving forward to new worlds to conquer. The writing is on the wall: but that’s beyond my topic here and your patience.
It is quite common when looking back on especially the last 30 or so years, comparing what was then to the mess we are part of to-day, to hear voices in nostalgia speaking of “the good old days” when everything still was all-right, especially in the ALC. Well, if every-thing or at least most really had been that “all right” the ALC never would have joined into what became the ELCA. The then new de-nomination simply displayed a theological corruption that was and had been as present in the ALC as in the LCA, but perhaps just a little bit less visibly so.
Suffer me at the next occasion to return to the 1960s and the small Lutheran synods then establishing themselves as an alternative in protest to what is going on in the country: why did they not flourish ? Why do they not flourish now, siphoning off the thin layer of discontent and muttering concern? Is there perchance anything to learn for you and your fledgling synod?
was born in 1943 in Bremen/Germany of a German-Swedish family; and since 1986, has been in the US. Approximately one third of his life has been spent in Germany, one-third in Sweden and a third in the United States. He is equally at ease in all three countries, cultures, and languages.
Dr. Schmutzler describes himself as "the hapless victim of an excellent European education" having received a BA in Malmö/ Sweden, and a Master of Divinity degree from the Royal University of Uppsala/Sweden with major in Old Testament Exegetics and Church History. Dr. Schmutzler spent half a year studying hard-core Lutheran systematics at the Church of the Lutheran Confession seminary in Eau Claire, Wisconsin and received a Doctor of Ministry from the Seminary of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, Ft. Wayne, Indiana, having completed his dissertation on church conflict management. He is especially interested in church history and systematic theology.
Dr. Schmutzler was ordained May 17, 1969 and is still (also) on the Church of Sweden roster. He has been continuously under call, since 1989 as Pastor and Pfarrer of Old Zion Lutheran Church /ELCA in Philadelphia PA, one of the original Heinrich Melchior Mühlenberg churches, and the only one still with services in German.
Dr. Schmutzler is happily married and describes himself as "a language nut, gun nut, flying nut (ultra-light), book nut, blacksmithing tyro, and frustrated fisherman," and as, "a Lutheran in the sense of the Christian Book of Concord, with a "quia" subscription."