Joseph Schereschewsky vs. Martin Luther

Whew! So far, this has been a week of close battles unparalleled in Lent Madness history. On Monday Mechtild of Magdeburg defeated Odo of Cluny 52% to 48%. On Tuesday Raymond Nonnatus bested Moses the Black 51% to 49%. And yesterday Augustine of Canterbury snuck past Scholastica 51% to 49%.

This heart-pumping saintly action is enough to make you want to do some yoga. Or deep breathing exercises. Or drink some chamomile tea. Something calming! But instead, the battles just keep coming. Today it's the scrappy Samuel Isaac Joseph Schereschewsky taking on the heavyweight Martin Luther. Is an upset in the making? Another tight race? Or will a blowout break the string of hotly contested, halo-busting battles?

Note that yesterday's battle was not without controversy. The following was posted by the Supreme Executive Committee:

The SEC noticed an irregular surge of votes for Scholastica around midnight. Well over 6,000 votes were found to be cast irregularly in an attack using bots around the world. We have removed what we believe to be the correct amount of votes, and will continue to monitor this race. One person, one vote. If you break this rule, your votes will be removed and you will be cast off into the outer darkness of Lent Madness.

We are confident in the final result. But remember, Big Lent is watching.

Joseph Schereschewsky

SIJ Schereschewsky was a cleric, missionary, and renowned translator of the prayer book and Bible. He knew 13 languages, and spent the last twenty years of his life typing out his translations with the fingers he still could move. (Sources vary on whether it was one or two fingers. Either way--that sounds hard.)

First off, his last name is pronounced “Share-es-shev-ski”. Think of Duke men’s basketball’s famous head coach from that OTHER bracket game for reference.

Schereschewsky’s translation of the Bible into Mandarin was so well-done that it became the standard translation that is still in use today. It took him from 1862-1875, so all that time was clearly justified. But he didn’t stop there. He believed that people couldn’t be truly faithful without also being educated, so he founded St. John’s University at Shanghai, and then went to work translating everything also into Wenli--another Chinese dialect. It was the Wenli manuscript that he meticulously typed out using two fingers, after Parkinson’s disease left him entirely paralyzed. The disease had caused him to resign his seat as the bishop of Shanghai, but he was determined that it should not stop his ministry. He produced over 2,000 pages just by sitting in his chair, and hen-pecking.

His contemporary biographer describes him thus: "paralysed in every limb, and with his powers of speech partly gone, sitting for nearly twenty-five years in the same chair, slowly and painfully typing out with two fingers his Mandarin translation of the Old Testament and Easy Wen-li translation of the whole Bible."

Schereschewsky grew up Jewish, and until his conversion, intended to be a rabbi. This affinity for Judaism didn’t disappear after his ordination; while in China, a small group of Kaifeng Jews--a tiny minority of Jews who emigrated to central China from Persia in the Middle Ages, came to visit him. This began a friendship, and Shereschewsky gave their community the Hebrew Scriptures that he translated into Mandarin. The community termed it “The Two-Finger Bible” because of Schereschewsky’s disability. This also contributes to the longevity of his biblical translation.  Because he knew Hebrew, and understood midrash and rabbinic ideas, modern scholar Irene Eder notes that his version “can be regarded as the only Chinese Old Testament to reflect not only the traditional Jewish text but to also included elements of the Jewish exegetical tradition.”

Regarding his work, he said, “I have sat in this chair for over twenty years. It seemed very hard at first. But God knew best. He kept me for the work for which I was best fitted.”

— Megan Castellan 

Martin Luther

Martin Luther’s life was filled with quirky meanderings. The path of his life bemused even him, “I am the son of a peasant…and the grandson and the great grandson. My father wanted to make me into a burgomaster. He went to Mansfeld and became a miner. I became a baccalaureate and a master. Then I became a monk and put off the brown beret. My father didn’t like it, and then I got into the pope’s hair and married an apostate nun. Who could have read that in the stars?” (Table Talk).

When he discovered that the people living around Wittenberg were not properly schooled in the basics of the faith, he wrote the Small Catechism, proposing this learning regimen “Children should be taught the habit of reciting [the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Our Father] daily... Until they recite them they should be given nothing to eat or drink.”

Luther took his faith and work seriously, but he also loved life: “Tomorrow I have to lecture on the drunkenness of Noah, so I should drink enough this evening to be able to talk about that wickedness as one who knows by experience.”

“Whenever the devil harasses you, seek the company of men or drink more, or joke and talk nonsense, or do some other merry thing. Sometimes we must drink more, sport, recreate ourselves, and even sin a little to spite the devil, so that we leave him no place for troubling our consciences with trifles. We are conquered if we try too conscientiously not to sin at all. So when the devil says to you: do not drink, answer him: I will drink, and right freely, just because you tell me not to.” 

And, scholars throughout history have been amused, occasionally appalled, by his scatological humor and insults: “Almost every night when I wake up the devil is there and wants to dispute with me. I have come to this conclusion: When the argument that the Christian is without the law and above the law doesn’t help, I instantly chase him away with a fart.” (Table Talk)

“Perhaps you want me to die of unrelieved boredom while you keep on talking.” (Luther’s Works)

And, some things haven’t changed even 500 years after Luther so pointedly highlighted time-wasting meetings: “If you who are assembled in a council are so frivolous and irresponsible as to waste time and money on unnecessary questions, when it is the business of a council to deal only with the important and necessary matters, we should not only refuse to obey you, but consider you insane or criminals.” (Luther’s Works).

— Beth Lewis

[poll id="192"]

Subscribe

* indicates required

Recent Posts

Archive

Archive

326 comments on “Joseph Schereschewsky vs. Martin Luther”

  1. This is a true story. Many years (decades) ago when I was with my mother and younger brother, the conversation somehow turned to Luther. After listening for a while, my brother suddenly gasped, "Theses? Really? I thought it was 95 feces and couldn't figure out how he nailed them up."
    I am not making this up.

  2. The perception of requiring children to recite before food and drink as child abuse is a bit of a stretch in my opinion. We do not eat dinner in our house before reciting a prayer. My adult son still complains that the Easter Bunny never arrived at our house until we came home from celebrating the Resurrection at worship. It does not seem to me that he recommends starving children but rather a structure of considering our spiritual needs before our physical needs.

  3. Love the wicked wit of Luther, but I gotta go with St. Sam. Anyone so dedicated to their ministry that they would hunt and peck type for 20 years gets my voted. God bless him!

  4. Had to go with Schereschewsky even if it did take 5 fingers to do so! I have always been in awe of any who spoke, read, wrote in more than four languages.

  5. I believe that it is a principle of the church that a sacrament received even from the hand of a priest who is guilty of notorious sin is still valid. In this year of the 500th anniversary of the posting of the 95 theses, I have to vote for the man who took that step and reformed the church and brought so many blessings to so many people, regardless of whether he personally was guilty of egregious sins. (I also very much liked today's write-up showing his sense of humor that I had not been aware of before.)

  6. For getting into the pope's hair, my vote goes to Martin Luther. His quotes are great. Chase the devil with a fart! Bahahahaha. That is one to remember.

  7. LAWL i like Martin Luther because he is my personal hero i really hope you guys vote for him.

  8. Schereschewsky got our vote, it was amazing to have the fortitude and devotion to transcribe the Bible in one language at a time and do it again, and again... and again. Even with his disability he still did it again.
    Something about booze and farting doesn't quite tell me "saintly", definitely not Golden Halo material.

  9. I voted for Schereschewsky, but no one can reasonably deny Luther's (flawed) greatness. I think the quotes in the write-up do him no disservice. They simply show that he was a human being, not a pewter figurine in a Catholic bookstore (yes, a Catholic bookstore).
    Another Luther quote: "When I fart in Wittenburg, they smell it in Rome."
    Go Joe!

  10. Thanks, SEC, for dealing with vote fraud yesterday! I checked last night, and there were only 4 votes' difference between Augustine and Scholastica. An hour later, Scholastica was ahead 75% to 25%. Obviously "thousands of illegals" had skewed the vote.

  11. Hmmm. It appears that the many Lutheran churches and colleges aren't aware of Lent Madness (or have mixed feelings about Luther). Recalling the pastor who wished his parish had been dubbed Holy Trinity rather than Luther Memorial. (It was amusing to see a piece of mail there that had been addressed to 'Luther M Church'.)

  12. Can't do Luther. Can't get over his antisemitism and advocating for the state imposed rape of women.

  13. Plot and Fix and Episcopalian Shenanigans! Bartender -- another German Beer Please!

  14. St. Sam- I love this! Perhaps lesser known in many circles but no less important! I appreciate his Jewish heritage and sensitivity toward the tiny Jewish sect!

  15. Luther had his shortcomings – which of us doesn’t? Nor was his anti-Semitism out of the ordinary for many theologians in the 16th Century. Doesn't make it right, nor is the Reformation complete. Luther's understanding that we are justified by faith and of God’s grace empower us sinners to get up each morning and do what needs to be done even. He also had courage to speak truth to power. Recall his statement at the Diet of Augsburg: “Hier stehe ich und kann nicht anders! Gott helfe mir, Amen."

  16. Although the "fart" appealed to my fourth graders, the vote of the combined 4 sections was definitively for Joseph Shereschewsky and his heroic translations. Nevertheless, he persisted! 37 for Joseph, 27 for Martin, meaning I cast my vote today on behalf of the 4th grade majority.

    1. How very cool that you're involving​ your students! Love it!
      You should tell the SEC, perhaps even send them a photo with your students, which perhaps they would share with us.

  17. My friend, Dottie 91 years young, and I both agreed on Joe S. Mainly because we didn't like Martin's teaching method. Children couldn't eat or drink until they recited.

  18. Roland Bainton (A Methodist Luther scholar at Yale) pointed out many of the inappropriate writing by Luther were done during the last couple years of his life when he suffered mental shortcomings. They had no way to diagnose or treat the symptoms back then. Besides; who was going to question or challenge Luther. Bainton concluded that Luther would have have done Christianity a favor by being quiet those last couple years or dying early!

    1. I saw someone make that point earlier, and I think it's important for people to consider. Haven't many of us dealt with someone who becomes "not quite themselves" in later life?

  19. I hate to denigrate Schereschewsky, who gave so much of his energy, but people have to think about impact and also about not "not" voting for Luther. In terms of impact, there is absolutely no comparison. I have studied the history of mission in China because my grandparents were missionaries there for nearly 40 years (Presbyterian, but I studied the history of Episcopal mission in China in seminary). The mission of the church in China at the time of Schereschewsky was going nowhere, and the dear man, who was made a bishop because nobody else would do it, pretty much stayed in his office and did translations. It wasn't entirely his fault that the church grossly underestimated the language barrier that eager young missionaries would face--most of them going home in discouragement, or dying of disease. He became a poster child for fundraisers at home, but mission efforts were taking on serious water during his tenure, and nothing really happened in Episcopal mission China until well after he was gone.

    One of the reasons I voted for Luther was that we Anglicans owe him a debt, for it is his church which gave assistance and inspiration to the early English reformers, including Thomas Cranmer, who drew quite a bit from Lutheran reformers for our first prayer book and for his theology of sacrament, among other things. To the extent that we balance the Catholic and Protestant, we owe a lot of the latter to Luther and his associates. Hearing reports of appalling preaching in the church of England, he sent people to teach preaching. Also, the singing!

    1. You know, I'm beginning to feel as too many Episcopalians have the same allergy to the p word (protestant), that fundamentalists have to the c word (catholic). This is quite tragic as our tradition is both catholic and reformed, and without that balance and synergy you lose the uniqueness and generosity of the Anglican ethos. That alone makes me want to cast a second vote for Martin..

        1. I agree, Brett. I am definitely of the Anglo-Catholic, Mary, Mass, and Incense crowd, but wherever we Anglicans fall within the high church-low church spectrum, we should never forget that we are, indeed, both catholic and reformed. That's what makes us Anglicans, our "double heritage" as it were. Thank you for reminding us of that.

      1. Hear hear! I quite agree. I learned first about this when doing a commentary on Episcopal ordination rites in a history of Anglican worship class and learned that Martin Bucer, a Strassburg Lutheran reformer and friend and contemporary of Cranmer's, was influential in the rite as we know it. Also, Luther appears to have been the loudest voice in determining which aspects of the Catholic Eucharist might be responsibly be retained, while other continental reformers were chucking parts of it over their shoulders. I think this must have been great support to the Anglican reformers who were trying to toe the line between tradition and reform whilst endeavoring to keep their heads.

      2. Hear hear! I quite agree. I learned first about this when doing a commentary on Episcopal ordination rites in a history of Anglican worship class and learned that Martin Bucer, a Strassburg Lutheran reformer and friend and contemporary of Cranmer's, was influential in the rite as we know it. Also, Luther was likely an influence in supporting the many aspects of the Roman Eucharistic rite might responsibly be retained, even as other continental reformers were merrily chucking huge swaths of it over their shoulders. I think this must have been great support to the Anglican reformers who were trying to toe the line between tradition and reform whilst endeavoring to keep their heads.

  20. Plus the f-word was forbidden in my upbringing and I never have found a way to say it without cringing.

  21. Luther! Reform Reform! No more indulgences!! The word belongs to the people, in their native tongue, and the communion host as well!!

  22. I'm feeling somewhat frustrated. With a fair amount of frequency, a commenter will toss off a statement like Luther "abused his wife" or he advocated "the state imposed rape of women.", and then she /he will write nothing further. Ladies and gentlemen, these single sentence assertions are meaningless if you don't explain what you are talking about. If you want to provide information, please give us a little more than that. I would truly appreciate it. (I don't mean this to be as cranky as it sounds)

  23. Voted for neither of these blokes in the first round.

    Voted for Bishop Sam this time. His continuing affinity with his Jewish heritage (as evidenced by his relationship with the local Jewish community while Bishop of Shanghai) brought me around. I've always believed that people who change their religious affiliation should regard themselves as having a vocation to be a bridge between their old faith community at its best and their new faith community at its best.

    Bishop Sam's courage in dealing with illness and disability was another positive factor for him.

    Luther's anti-Judaic writings in his later years (particularly when his early writings took a far more positive tone toward Jews and Judaism) was also a big factor in may vote.

    Another factor causing me to vote against Luther was the bitter polemic tone of his language re the RC church. Obviously, the Western Church was crying out for reform in its theology, liturgy, spirituality, and internal politics. But Luther's bitter language helped to ensure that this reform was also accompanied by the fact of Christians breaking communion and fellowship with each other. I will never celebrate the breach of communion among any Christians.

    1. Amen! I agree with your concluding sentence so much.... May we never celebrate a breach of communion between groups of us. And I would add, between any groups acting in good will.