LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary

More documents

Recommendations

Info

90 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII and then sent them on to Francke, sometimes appending his own comments on the issues discussed in the letters. Francke was the one who normally answered Muehlenberg’s letters sending them first to Ziegenhagen. Ziegenhagen occasionally sent along his own note to Francke’s response to Muehlenberg. This meant that the mail, already slow because it relied on sailing ships for passage across the ocean, might be further delayed, especially if Ziegenhagen was ill or away from home when the letter came from either direction. Thus, on 6 June 1743, Muehlenberg complained that he had already written three times without having received an answer. He was particularly distressed that Ziegenhagen was not moved to respond. On 24 May 1744, Muehlenberg related all of the places on the continent from which he had received mail, but said, “From our dear Fathers in London [translate: Ziegenhagen], I have not seen anything even though up to five ships arrived here or in New York this spring.” When Ziegenhagen finally did write personally to Muehlenberg in fall 1744, it was to tell him that additional pastoral help was on the way. 124 Although Muehlenberg may have preferred to deal with Ziegenhagen rather than Francke, the pattern which emerged was that most of his correspondence was with Francke. Actually, since there was regular direct correspondence between Ziegenhagen and Francke, Francke often spoke for both of them. Thus, in a letter to the pastors in Philadelphia, Francke wrote, “In response to the desire expressed in several earlier letters for new workers, Court Chaplain Ziegenhagen and I have determined under the call of God to search for two new co-workers and to cover the travel costs from here and England.” 125 Occasionally, Ziegenhagen did add his own comments to what Francke wrote. One such occasion was regarding whether Muehlenberg should leave Pennsylvania and accept a call to New York. Muehlenberg had written to Ziegenhagen and Francke from New York on 15 June 1751 telling them about the exciting challenge of uniting the Dutch and German congregations in that city and reminding them of the problems which he had encountered in Pennsylvania. He felt disheartened and inadequate for the work in Pennsylvania. As he said, “It is difficult to make a writing quill out of a pickaxe.” 126 Muehlenberg soon changed his mind about moving to New York; after constantly being on horseback in Pennsylvania, he felt as though he was confined in a prison in New York. But his earlier letter about the New York call prompted a response both from Francke and 124 Muehlenberg to Francke and Ziegenhagen, Philadelphia, 6 March 1745, printed in Aland 1:150. Ziegenhagen’s letter is not extant but one gathers from Muehlenberg’s letter that it was “business”. 125 Francke to Handschuh and Muehlenberg, Halle, 18 March 1751, printed in Aland 1:391. 126 Muehlenberg to Francke and Ziegenhagen, New York, 15 June 1751, printed in Aland 1:406-415.
THREINEN: FRIEDRICH MICHAEL ZIEGENHAGEN 91 from Ziegenhagen. It was, in fact, the first personal response from Ziegenhagen to Muehlenberg in nine years. Francke thanked Muehlenberg for opening his heart to himself and Ziegenhagen and relating what was bothering him. He promised to pray for him and the work in Pennsylvania. In response to Muehlenberg’s questioning his adequacy for the work, Francke assured him that he had been faithful and had demonstrated wisdom. In his P. S., Ziegenhagen indicated that he may have changed his earlier negative assessment of Muehlenberg. He assured Muehlenberg that, although he had not written for a long time, he was of the same mind as Francke. He urged Muehlenberg not to abandon his Pennsylvania congregations. “God has sent you to the poor, unruly, and torn congregations in Philadelphia, New Hanover, and Providence”, he said. By His mercy, through your service and work, he has also begun to make improvement and show hope for the future. This is the station to which God has directed you and where you will most certainly experience His grace, help, and support. Therefore, it is by no means wise under any circumstance—unless you have indication that it is the clear and certain will of God—for you to leave it. 127 Prior to receiving the advice of Francke and Ziegenhagen, Muehlenberg had turned down the call and returned to Pennsylvania on 11 November 1751. But the people in New York still wanted Muehlenberg to come, and evidently Muehlenberg still struggled with whether he should not perhaps reverse his decision and go to New York. In the meantime, two new workers arrived in America on 1 December 1751, and Muehlenberg was anxious to know from them what Ziegenhagen and his associate, Court Chaplain Albinus, really thought about the idea. One of the two new workers was Frederick Schultze, a man who later showed himself to be spiritually and psychologically immature, and the message which Muehlenberg got about how Ziegenhagen viewed Muehlenberg and his situation was not entirely accurate. Among other things, Schultze told Muehlenberg that Ziegenhagen thought he wanted to enter this new field of service because he was dissatisfied with the poor conditions in Pennsylvania and was looking for greener pastures in New York. 128 Muehlenberg tried to correct what he perceived to be erroneous impressions of him in London. However, it is apparent that he was unhappy both with what he read in Ziegenhagen’s advice to him as well as what he heard through the new workers about Ziegenhagen’s attitude toward him. On 1 June 1752, Muehlenberg complained to Albinus about the “condescension” toward him in the letters 127 Ziegenhagen to Muehlenberg, Kensington, 7 October 1751, printed in Aland 1:441-442. 128 Muehlenberg to Ziegenhagen and Francke, Providence, 18 February 1752, printed in Aland 1:476-494.
Page 1:
LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW publish
Page 4 and 5:
4 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII S
Page 6 and 7:
LTR XII (Academic Year 1999-2000):
Page 8 and 9:
8 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII W
Page 10 and 11:
10 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
LTR XII (Academic Year 1999-2000):
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41: 40 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII
Page 44 and 45: LTR XII (Academic Year 1999-2000):
Page 110: 110 LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW XII
show all

LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL REVIEW - Concordia Lutheran Seminary

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?