2 Hanewinkel, “Hanewinkel Notes for W. H. T. Dau,” 3.
3 Carl S. Mundinger, Government in the Missouri Synod (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953), 52–53.
4 William Koepchen, “Pastor Martin Stephan and the Saxon Emigration of 1838,” (unpublished ms., St. Louis: Concordia Historical Institute; New York: Stephan Family Archives, 1935), 17.
5 Koepchen, “Pastor Martin Stephan and the Saxon Emigration of 1838,” 10.
6 Mundinger, Government in the Missouri Synod, 42. Franz Delitzsch was a world-renowned Lutheran professor of Old Testament theology at the University of Leipzig. It is likely that Martin Stephan had studied with him. Delitzsch had attended services at St. John’s Lutheran Church in Dresden where Stephan was pastor.
7 Hanewinkel, “Hanewinkel Notes for W. H. T. Dau,” Hanewinkel Notes, f4–f10 (St. Louis: Concordia Historical Institute, 1921), 147–53. This is a letter that Franz Delitzsch wrote to Ludwig Fischer regarding Martin Stephan.
8 General Lexicon of Creative Artists, vol. 21 (Leipzig: E. A. Seeman, 1927), 13ff.
9 Mundinger, Government in the Missouri Synod, 81.
10 Julia Stephan, “To My Tiny Martin,” trans. John Conrads (New York: Stephan Family Archives, n.d.). Mr. Conrads is the translator for much of the material in this book that was either handwritten in old German script or typed from the old German script. Some parts were difficult to read. Mr. Conrads is a native-born German who came to the United States after World War II. He is now a U.S. citizen who has a fine grasp of Christian theology and teaches a Bible class in the Reformed Church in Longmont, Colorado.
11 Mundinger, Government in the Missouri Synod, 49. Mundinger references Hanewinkel, “Hanewinkel Notes for W. H. T. Dau,” 2.
12 Koepchen, “Pastor Martin Stephan and the Saxon Emigration of 1838,” 11.
13 See photo in photo spread.
14 Kenneth Scott Latourette, A History of Christianity (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1953), 1018. This group of von Zinzendorf followers became very mission minded because they believed that their personal vision of Christianity deserved to be told to the world.
15 Latourette, A History of Christianity, 1018–19.
16 Mary Todd, Authority Vested (Grand Rapids, Mich.: W. B. Eerdmans, 2000), 23.
7
Martin Stephan as Preacher
Apparently, there was nothing simple about Martin Stephan. His complexity also shows in his preaching. There were widely varying opinions about his preaching. A church newsletter of June of 1838 said that in a short time Stephan had “gathered a large audience, seeking salvation for he truly preached the Gospel.”1 Some people commented that Stephan was like a “house of bread” in which every hungry person could come and find fresh nutritious food. He had no cathedral or large imposing church. It was from this modest little chapel that he fashioned sermons and proclaimed plain truths from the scriptures.
C. F. W Walther, later elected the first president of the Missouri Synod, commented on Stephan’s preaching, “Stephan possessed none of the arts of worldly oratory; at least the richly endowed man did not employ them. Hardly moving a hand, seldom modulating his voice without any force of expression, he plainly and simply declared the counsel of God for man’s salvation.”2 Another member of the congregation, attorney Eduard Vehse, said that Stephan’s eminent qualities as a preacher have been admitted by his most bitter enemies. Ludwig Fischer, author of Das falsche Maertyrertum and frequent guest preacher at St. Peter’s in Leipzig, was quoted as saying, “There can be no doubt that Stephan had the power of language in an unusual measure and was a most edifying preacher.”3,4
Dr. Benjamin Kurtz commented on Stephan’s preaching after going to his church because of von Einseidel’s recommendation of the solid preaching. Detlev von Einsiedel had promised the visiting Kurtz that he would hear a man that has the spirit of Christ within him and proclaims the Gospel faithfully. After his visit at St. John’s, Kurtz wrote in his Baltimore, Maryland, German-language newspaper that when they approached the church the crowd was so thick that they could barely get into the church. He thought that Stephan reminded him of Dr. Dwight, the former president of Yale College. He also noted that the sermon Stephan preached was plain, vigorous, and evangelic, and well-designed to enlighten the mind and affect the heart.
Another member of St. John’s congregation and an intimate friend of Stephan, Karl G. von Polenz, deputy of the Saxon Landtag, joined those who were edified by Stephan’s preaching. Even though he later became a harsh critic, his positive report about Stephan’s preaching remains: “Who ever heard him once, if he was not filled with a spirit of reviling [self-deprecation], felt himself moved to the innermost depths of his soul, without really knowing how this had been accomplished.”5 In his own book, von Polenz wrote in late 1840 about Stephan’s preaching: “With a Bohemian accent and with faulty use of the German language, this man boldly preached the foolishness of the Gospel in one of the most cultured cities of Germany.”6 Koepchen also adds his own appraisal of Stephan’s preaching saying, “In his sermons Stephan aimed to influence not so much the emotions as the conscience. In this, his wonderful knowledge of men and of the human heart was of great service to him, that he designed to arouse the emotions to enthusiasm.”7
However, in the philosophical climate of rationalism and German discomfort with expressing emotions, which seemed like enthusiasm to some, a few thought Stephan was not preaching sound Lutheran doctrine. In 1821 an anonymous writer labeled Martin Stephan’s preaching as mystical, and he accused Stephan of promoting separatism in his adult edification hour. The anonymous critic thought that Stephan caused people in his congregation to do insane things because they were aroused by Stephan’s “enthusiasm.” Stephan was charged with creating a sect or a sectarian climate. The press and clergy opposing him called his followers “Stephanier.” The article went on to say, “This congregation was a mob of very ignorant boneheads, crazy fanatics whose meetings led to lunacy and murder.” The article was reprinted in Dresden’s Nationalzeitung and was published November 21, 1821, from The Correspondent from and for Germany earlier that year.8
This attack by his local colleagues needed to be addressed telling his story, his truth. It was a crisis of conscience because his integrity was at stake. Stephan finally responded to the Nationalzeitung article. He made it clear he was neither a sectarian nor leading a sect by stating the Lutheran oath of allegiance, the one he took at ordination. He stood firmly on the apostles, prophets, and the Lutheran Confessions in his teaching and preaching:
This letter (from the anonymous writer) informs the public, that a certain “sect,” calling themselves “Stephanier” and which has come to light here in Dresden, is given to dangerous vagaries. The name given in the communication and the veiled references to devotional meetings held in the parsonage of my congregation plainly show that the anonymous writer meant me and my church. The entire story about that newest sect in Dresden is cut out of whole cloth; there is none such, and if the author should happen to believe it himself, it could only be because of his sublime ignorance. Truth, however, compels me to declare that he is a malicious slanderer, who evidently is trying to place me and my congregation into an odious position before the public by disseminating lies. I am neither the founder of a sect nor the leader of a sect; I neither belong to an old nor a new sect; I hate all sectarianism, fanaticism and vagaries (Schwarmerei). I am an Evangelical Lutheran minister, preaching the Word of God as it is written in the Bible.
Pastor Stephan defined his own tenets of faith:
I am building my congregation upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ being the chief cornerstone. (Eph. 2:20) I hold and teach the apostolic doctrine so courageously and purely preached by Luther. I preach the Law and the Gospel, the knowledge of Sin and that of Grace in Christ, I preach Faith in Jesus Christ, the incarnate Son of God, and the reconciliation for sins of the world, which He accomplished on the cross, I preach all this plainly and not
in a strange mystic sense, but in the sense which our pious forbears set forth so plainly in our Symbolical writings. [This is a reference to the Book of Concord, 1580.] I have no peculiar or particular religious opinion: my religion stands neither above the Bible, nor below the Bible, but in the Bible, it leads to Christ and keeps with Him.9
Stephan emphasized the open and public nature of both his preaching and devotional meetings, inviting any friend or critic to attend worship services or the meetings. Then, he told the public about the weekly meeting called “conventicles” which had come under attack:
I preach my sermons in the church building and conduct the repetition of them—called prayer meetings “Betstunden” by Mr. Anonymous—in the school room in the parsonage only, and always with doors open to all who care to come. Had Mr. Anonymous been a seeker after truth and a lover of it, he would have attended my church service, been present in the devotional meetings, and would personally have heard and seen all that is said and done ... Neither has madness nor murder occurred among my parishioners ... the Word of God, which I preach, cannot turn a man mad or make him commit murder, for it is the Word of Life, bringing the life that is of God.10
In December 1823, two years after writing this response, the same newspaper published two of Stephan’s sermons addressed to the general public of Dresden. These two homilies were titled “Serious Admonition to All Evangelical Christians” and “Remain on the Foundation of the Prophets and Apostles, with Jesus Christ as the Chief Cornerstone.” In a foreword to them he explained his reasons for defending himself against the charge that he was promoting mysticism and sectarianism. He carefully defined a mystic as one who places his own internal emotions as the final revelation above the Word of God and does not respect the Word of God as the ultimate authority in making decisions in life. Stephan clarified as appropriate “feelings inspired by the Holy Spirit.” In saying this, he was willing to legitimize a pastor’s preaching to the emotions and conscience of the hearer. As far as Stephan was concerned, he was vindicated of the accusations until someone came forward to prove otherwise. His supervisors were satisfied with his statement of theology, and no charges were pressed against him at this time.
What some critics considered a form of mysticism was not mystical at all but Stephan’s personal preaching to the heart of the hearer. He speaks often in a personal way to the person in the pew, applying the Gospel to their daily lives. He explains how the Spirit of God “awakens” the lives of his hearers to joy and gladness over what God has done to equip them to overcome their trials, burdens and temptations. This kind of emotional holism was unheard of in many German Lutheran Churches at this time. Perhaps this kind of preaching brought many new people to St. John’s Church, because Stephan spoke about the love of God from his heart to theirs. He preached a kind of hope and comfort for their everyday lives. The German congregation grew, and they loved Stephan for the good news he brought them.
In 1825 Martin Stephan published a two-volume work of sermons he had preached during the 1824 church year. On the flyleaf opposite the title page of the book, Martin’s picture appears showing his right hand placed on an open Bible. His thumb rests on a page from the New Testament book of Romans. The inscription on the right hand page is taken from Romans 1:16, the verse that is the symbol and motto for his ministry: “I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God.”
Stephan titled this two-volume book of sermons The Christian Faith. He wrote a prayer that opens and dedicates the work. In it he mentions how God’s grace guided him since childhood into the Christian ministry and continued to rescue him from errant paths. He offered this book of sermons as a thanksgiving for the many gifts he had been given, and he asked God’s blessing on this work and on those who read the sermons, that they might, like him, know the joy of faith.
On the title page of the first volume he quotes from the book of Colossians 2:8: “Beware lest any person spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of mankind, after the rudiment of the world, and not after Christ.” Another passage from St. Paul is engraved on the title page of the second volume, Ephesians 4:14 which read “Do not allow yourselves to be tossed to and fro by all kinds of wind of doctrine, through the cunning and deceit of mankind, whereby they surreptitiously deceive us.”11
The foreword of these sermon volumes states the reason for publishing them. Stephan decided to share them due to “the insistent desire of those who heard him preach them.” However, he did not believe that these spoken sermons were exactly appropriate for reading. Many he used in the adult edification groups designed as study groups to explore the passages in the Bible that are footnoted in the text of each sermon. He taught the readers how to study them by having their Bibles handy for further exploration.
Stephan stated his intention for authoring this two-volume work in a precise way:
My honest endeavor has been, in all these sermons, to present, according to the common Gospel selections, the evangelical doctrine as it is contained in the Old and New Testaments, by them to lead people to true faith in Jesus Christ, to a righteous holy life, to give them comfort in suffering and lead them to a blessed death. I have taken great pains to preach very plainly, so as to be understood by the simplest reader, I have studiously avoided all high sounding learned words.
What I have preached I believe with my whole heart. I am firmly convinced the Bible can be the only fountain of pure Christian doctrine. Out of this, our pious forefathers have drawn and preserved the pure doctrine in the confessional writings of the Evangelical Lutheran Church for us. My sincere intention is to publish this doctrine in the book.12
Stephan followed a common structure in each of his published sermons. Each begins with a prayer that relates to the text of the day. Following the prayer, there is exactly the same pulpit greeting, “to the hearers who have been redeemed by the precious blood of Jesus Christ.” After this greeting and dedication, there follows a general introduction to the theme of the day, especially on feast days. The text for the day, usually from the state church lectionary, is read and sometimes followed by a paraphrase of the reading. In introducing the text, Stephan outlines the sermon and usually tells the reader how the topic will be presented in three parts.
Stephan’s published sermons offer a rich testimonial to his theology and his personal spirituality. His stated purpose was to make known that his preaching and beliefs conform to the evangelical doctrine. Whether he also intended this document as an apologia for his work is not known; the book of sermons, aptly named, does provide clear statements of what he thought and taught.
The content of Stephan’s sermons has drawn some attention over time, and some critics have questioned his orthodoxy. Paul Burgdorf, a Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod (LCMS) pastor, described Stephan’s preaching as Christ centered in a 1990 article titled “Martin Stephan’s Published Sermons on The Christian Faith”:
In the sermons, he assured the readers that he preached more about “faith in Jesus Christ” than about “morality.” He was convinced that such faith is the source of all true sanctification, of all good works, and of all true comfort. If someone judged these sermons through the lenses of rationalistic doctrine they would be doing a disservice to them.13
Burgdorf examined two of Stephan’s sermons. One was based on Matthew 13:24–30, the parable of the wheat and the tares and the other on a similar text in Mark 16:14–20, the account of Christ’s Ascension. The first text was preached on the fifth Sunday after Epiphany and the second text on the Ascension of our Lord Sunday. Burgdorf contends that Stephan wrote similar statements about both of these texts. What Stephan wrote below raised Burgdorf’s concern about Martin’s doctrine on Christ’s Second Coming. The quotes from these sermons are excerpts from Stephan’s two sermons:
We have reason to hope for a time in which the kingdom of God for the coming of which we pray daily will really come and get to be great and glorious in the world, when the knowledge and salvation of
Jesus Christ will overflow the earth (Isaiah 11:9; Revelation 20:6; Habakkuk 2:14) like the Deluge once overflowed it; when the devil will no more be able to mislead men, as is happening now; when great blessing and great peace will rest upon mankind.... Although we now rightly look for a better time in the world, it will however never get to be so that no evil, no sin will exist among men. God’s acre will never be fully free of tares until the Lord Himself cleanses it forever on the Day of Judgment.14
Burgdorf seems to think that Stephan “unfortunately shows leanings toward chiliasm,” or, as he says, “the aberration from Article XVII of the Augsburg Confession, Millennialism.” Millennialism is the teaching that Christ will come again and reign for a thousand years and then Judgment Day will come. Another version of millennial teaching proposes Christ will return and bring in the Judgment Day, and then there will be a thousand year reign of Christ on the earth. It is pictured as a time of peace when all suffering and evil have been defeated. Christ will then reign on earth.
The labeling of Stephan’s theology as millennialist is not accurate according to either interpretation. Stephan is speaking of the kingdom of God that is always among us. Martin Luther and other theologians have explained this tension about the coming of the Kingdom of God and the Final Judgment Day by saying “the coming of the Kingdom of God is here among us, but not yet.” Stephan seems to capture that human longing for the “peaceable kingdom of God” and allows himself for a moment in this sermon to hope for the day when the Gospel will transform the human situation and bring peace on earth. He says, “We rightly look for a better time in the world, it will however, never get to be so when there is sin and evil.” It is a bit of a stretch to label Stephan as a chiliast or millennialist based only on one paragraph in one sermon. To raise the specter of false teaching on so slender a basis is equally wrong.
In Pursuit of Religious Freedom: Bishop Martin Stephan's Journey Page 7
