# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1850 12 10_S61
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

61

es all to be thrown away unexamined, because it was also observed by the so-called Catholics? Then we should not have been allowed to baptize, because baptism is also performed in the papacy. We should not have been allowed to pray, because "the Catholics" also pray, etc. The papists, after all, have only added errors to the truth, and thereby, to be sure, disfigured the truth itself and in fact abandoned it. The errors Luther put away, but the truth he retained. Does that mean taking something over from the "Catholic" Church? No! It means: retaining what the "Catholics" themselves received from the apostolic age, from the first centuries, when no one yet thought of a pope. And even if it had arisen in the time of the papacy, yet it does not conflict with God's Word; why then abolish it? Does one refuse the dollar because it, too, has passed through the hands of thieves and cheats? God's Word, not such an outward thing as whether it also occurs among the papists, decides in all matters, also in church customs. By this rule Luther, for example, rejected the invocation of the saints; for that is a practice which does homage to false doctrine, to the error that there are other mediators than the Son of God and of Mary; but the pictures of Christ, of the apostles and of other saints he did not thereby reject, because one may very well have them in churches and elsewhere, in order by beholding them the better to be reminded of those they portray. Whoever should forbid us even today this latter would make something a sin for us that is no sin, would take from us the liberty which we as Christians have, would restrict our Christian freedom wholly contrary to God's Word, and would bring us into shameful bondage. You see, that is why Luther and the whole Lutheran Church to this very day protest against the shameful presumption of the Reformed in forbidding such ceremonies as can be observed without harm to the pure doctrine, such as having a crucifix in the church, or a picture representing holy persons and subjects, using wafers at the holy Supper, making the sign of the cross, and the like. Be it well understood, however, that the Lutheran Church does not command such ceremonies, makes no law of them, but protests against the prohibition of them, and by the observance of them preserves its Christian freedom.

You will find fuller instruction on this subject in the Book of Concord: Augsburg Confession, Art. XXVI. (in the New York edition, p. 44): "Also many ceremonies are observed on this side, etc., such as the order of the Mass and other chants, festivals, etc., which serve to the end that order be kept in the Church." Apology of the Augsburg Confession, IV. Of the Church (p. 147): "But as the unity of the churches is not thereby broken, though in one country, in one place, the days be naturally longer or shorter than in another: so we also hold that the unity of the churches is not thereby broken, though such ordinances of men have in one place this, in another that order. Although it also pleases us well that the universal ceremonies be kept alike for the sake of unity and good order." Formula of Concord: Summary Statement X. Of Church Usages: Of ceremonies or church usages which are neither commanded nor forbidden in God's Word, but have been introduced into the Church for the sake of good order and decorum, etc. (p. 503.)

As to the sign of the cross in particular, it is a gross error to suppose that it derives from the papists. The papists have it, to be sure, but as they have baptism, the Gospels, the general creeds and other things, not from the Pope, nor from the time of the papacy, but from the apostolic Church. This is also connected with no papistical false doctrine, but contends against it. This sign confesses the Crucified, that He made our reconciliation with God on the cross, and by His innocent suffering and dying redeemed us from sin, death and the devil, whereas the papists in their false doctrine ascribe this honor, at least in part, to the saints and to their own merit. The origin of this sign is Golgotha, where the cross stood. There the LORD honored it, and on it, with His outstretched arms, Himself took on the form of the cross. Do we then fall away from our faith by such a sign, which so powerfully reminds us of our Savior? Do we thereby break what we vowed at the altar? I beg you, dear friend, how can you come to such thoughts? Do you not know that Luther always had a crucifix on his table? Do you not read in his Small Catechism: "In the morning, when thou risest from thy bed, thou shalt bless thyself with the holy cross, etc., etc."? Have you not heard that the first Christians greeted one another by making a cross before the forehead? A highly deserving Lutheran divine, Johann Gerhard, writes of it: The ancient Christians, who dwelt among heathens who reviled them for the sake of the cross of Christ (1 Cor. 1, 23), marked their foreheads with this sign. Thereby they testified that they gloried in it as their badge of honor. They thereby made a confession of their faith, and proclaimed how highly they esteemed the sufferings of Christ." An ancient teacher of the Christian Church, Cyrillus, who in the years 350-386, thus at a time when men had not yet thought of the errors of the papacy, was bishop in Jerusalem, writes of it: "Let us not be ashamed to confess the Crucified, but with joyfulness press the sign of the cross upon the forehead." Another, Augustinus, who lived about the year 400, writes the following about it: "For the sake of the cross of Christ the wise of this world mock us and say: How is it that you worship a crucified God? - But upon the forehead one shall mark it, etc., etc." And Johann Gerhard teaches further concerning it: "Thus we make the sign of the cross, first, to testify to our faith, that we believe in Christ the Crucified, and therefore press this sign upon forehead and breast, as a witness that we are not ashamed to belong to Christ, but bear Him in the heart; then, in remembrance that we also, for the sake of the confession of Christ, must bear the cross."

Equally unfounded is the distrust which you harbor toward another church usage, namely the absolving of individuals in the confessional. That this is the Lutheran custom, and that general confession dates from the time of decline, I have already demonstrated to you. You can convince yourself of it if you read over in the Book of Concord the passages which treat of private absolution, as: Art. XI and XXV of the Augsb. Conf., Apol. of the Augsb. C. (p. 153): "if they all in a whole parish run to the altar at one time, they cannot be so diligently examined and instructed." P. 154: "Although it is now good to instruct the rude and inexperienced to name some sins in confession, etc., etc." P. 175: Therefore it would be against God (ungodly!) to abolish absolution out of the Church thus, etc., etc."). Smalcald Articles: 8. Of Confession (p. 309), Luther's Small Catechism: "How the simple are to be taught to confess, etc., etc." Large Catechism (p. 470 at the close: "Therefore, when I exhort to confession, I do nothing else than exhort every one to be a Christian; if I bring you to that, then I have also well brought you to confession."), Formula of Concord: Art. XI (p. 641: "Therefore we also retain, as the Augsb. Confession says, private absolution, and teach that it is God's command that we believe such absolution, etc., etc.")

This usage also does not derive from the papacy. Already in the third century traces of it are found, and indeed the desire for it then proceeded from the members of the congregations. What can also be more comforting to a Christian than, according to John 20, 23, Matt. 18, 18, to hear in absolution the voice of Christ, His comforting word of forgiveness? Therefore it has always been dear to Christians. It has been abolished by enthusiasts, false teachers and unbelievers. Therefore the Lutheran Church alone has retained it. It has cost her a struggle to preserve this jewel. Luther left the Wartburg in 1522 in order, among other things, also to re-establish in Wittenberg the private absolution abolished by the enthusiast Carlstadt. In the sermon which he then preached on the office of the keys it says: "No one knows what holy confession avails, except he who must often fight and struggle with the devil. I should long since have been overcome and strangled by the devil, if this confession had not preserved me. For there are many doubtful and erring matters, in which a man alone cannot well find his way, nor comprehend himself." Equally warmly be-