# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1852 04 13_S133
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

133

tivity for us to see assembled here a larger number of precisely those who form the circle of Bavarian Lutheran servants of the Word, in whose midst Pastor Löhe stands. Present, besides the aforementioned himself, as many as we still remember, were the pastors Wucherer of Nördlingen, Stirner of Fürth, Fischer of Aufseß and Fischer of Artelshofen, Volk of Rüpland, Rödel of Mengersdorf, Semm of Memmingen; Catechist Bauer (director of the mission institution) of Nürnberg, and Assessor Hommel of Erlangen. Although in the private conversations with one and another of those assembled doctrinal differences soon came to light, which existed between us and them, yet we must confess that the spirit which showed itself among these dear men soon turned our whole heart toward them. We found here a simplicity of heart, an openness, a sincerity, an earnestness, a joyfulness of faith, a courage and zeal to give up everything for God's Word and honor, and a unity such as we had not yet found in Germany in larger Christian communions. †)

†) Interesting for us Americans at this assembly was the circumstance that, after the proceedings had begun, a soldier entered, who showed an instruction given him by the higher authorities, according to which he had the order to watch over the proceedings.

After the close of the conference Pastor Wyneken traveled back to Neuendettelsau, in order to preach there on the following Sunday, while I went by way of Nürnberg, where I again lodged in the dear house of Mr. Volk, to Erlangen. For since I had, as already mentioned, been commissioned by the Synod to prepare a certain writing and to have the same printed in Germany in its name, but had been hindered by illness from finishing it here, I resolved to do this in Erlangen, where I hoped to obtain most easily the literary aids necessary to my work from the university library there. I thought, to be sure, that in a space of about two weeks I could make the writing ready for the press; but almost daily interruptions (which were brought about by invitations received, as friendly as they were honorable) prolonged our stay in Erlangen — Pastor Wyneken soon followed me thither — to one of a month. On the 10th of October I arrived in Erlangen. I hastened above all to my old dear friend from my candidate years, Dr. Delitzsch, who, called hither from Rostock a year ago, now labors here as regular Professor of Theology. The joy of seeing each other again, after a long series of years rich in experience, was great. Although in the meantime the unassuming friend of my youth had become a learned, influential, and renowned German professor, he was nevertheless still the same humble-hearted man as of old, who was not ashamed even now of our bond of friendship formed in youth and met me with that, I might say, tenderness of love peculiar only to a Delitzsch. Through Professor Delitzsch I was then also presently introduced to his colleagues, among whom we — Pastor Wyneken was already personally acquainted with most of them — found a reception exceeding all our expectations, most kind and friendly. These were the Professors and Doctors of Theology Hofmann, Thomasius, Höfling and Schmid; further the Professors Karl and Rudolph von Raumer and von Schaden of the philosophical, and Professor von Scheuerl of the juridical faculty. That it was just now vacation time was a fortunate circumstance for us. This made it possible for these highly honored gentlemen to devote more time to us than they otherwise could have done. Few were the days on which we did not, at the invitation received, dine at the table of one or another of the named professors and take part in their conferences in a third place. It would lead me too far were I to enumerate all the interesting things that were offered us through our intercourse with such distinguished men, and to describe the benefit which we have derived from it. In respect of our American Lutheran Church we found here the liveliest interest, especially for our theological institution in St. Louis, the further vigorous support of which was promised us with great readiness. Yet here too it did not remain without conflict. With the exception of Professor Delitzsch, namely, all the theological professors here professed the principles concerning the holy ministry of preaching which Professor Dr. Höfling has lately expressed and defended in several writings directed against Pastor Löhe. According to these, namely, the office is not only, as our Symbols say, indeed given to the Church "immediately" and rests in her as to its root or "originally" (principaliter); but the same, so far as it is committed particularly to certain persons, set up in a congregation and publicly administered on behalf of the community, is to rest not upon a special divine institution, not upon an express command of the LORD; but is to have arisen solely out of a "social and ethical necessity," that is, it is to have come into life in the Church only because otherwise the Church as an ordered society could not exist and could not attain its ends as a gathering institution. The utmost that Professor Höfling concedes here is that the LORD has indeed made known His will, that the Church might perform in the (from of old customary) manner the command given her to administer Word and Sacrament, having "indicated" it, signified it. But every divine institution of the pastoral office by means of a definite divine command the aforesaid rejects as something which would give the office the character of a ceremonial-legal arrangement and conflict with the most proper principle (highest tenet) of the evangelical (Lutheran) Church. To this view we were obliged, of course, to object decidedly, since our Confessions on the ground of the divine Word rather declare: "We have a sure doctrine, that the ministry of preaching comes from the common calling of the apostles. (Smalcald Art. 1. Appendix. New York ed. page 318.)." But that the apostolic office rests on divine command and on divine institution, Professor Höfling too does not deny. Further it says in the 7th Article of the Apology: "The Church has God's command that she shall appoint preachers and deacons." (Page 194.) According to this, therefore, the Church has not only in general the divine command to put the means of grace into practice, but also the special command to appoint the office lying in her in such form that it be administered by definite persons, by "preachers and deacons"; the holy office in the narrower sense, the pastoral office or presbyterate, is therefore not merely mediate by reason of the command which the Church has in general, but an immediate divine ordinance and institution. We have therefore finally been obliged to testify that the conception of the ministry of preaching, as it appears according to the expositions of Professor Höfling, is at bottom the Socinian, which our Church has continually rejected.*). Not without dismay we learned, moreover, from a private correspondence communicated to us, that the otherwise likewise so excellent Lutheran theologians at the University of Dorpat also agree throughout on this point with the majority of those at Erlangen.

*) Among others the Socinian Schmalz writes: "We do not deny that from that custom of the first apostolic Church it follows that what once happened may rightly happen even today" (namely, that particular persons were called and appointed to the ministry of preaching), "but not of necessity, but for the sake of good order and propriety, or also for the sake of the authority of the first Church." (In the writing against Wolfg. Franz p. 377. 79.) It cannot, of course, occur to me hereby to want to parallel in the remotest way the Professor Dr. Höfling, who has become so dear to me, with a Socinian teacher, since he not only otherwise cherishes no Socinian principles on any point, but is also far from drawing such conclusions from his doctrine of the holy ministry of preaching as could in any way lead to Socinian confusion. This lies already in the fact that he claims an ethical as well as social necessity for the office of teaching and pastoring. I wished only to point out how such doctrine has already been present in the Church, but has also already been overcome by her.

Another cause of a certain discord, which wished to diminish somewhat our unconstrained enjoyment of fellowship with the honored men, was that they the