# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1852 04 27_S140
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

140

"that the passage Matth. 28 in the 4th chief part be cited, faithfully translated in accordance with the original text, in a note;" the execution will show whether the members of the Ministerium understand Greek better and can render that passage into pure German better than Dr. Luther. But what will the people think when the Lutheran translation stands in the text and the Pennsylvania one under the text? They will think, if Luther is right, then let him be right; if not, then strike out his text and put your note in its place; yea, the people will pronounce judgment upon such "improvements" with Luther's own words from his preface to the small Catechism, thus: "Let the preacher take one form before him, whereon he abide and which he always urge, one year like the other; for the young and simple people must be taught with one certain text and form, otherwise they are all too easily confused, if one teaches thus today and a year hence otherwise, as if one wished to improve it, and all trouble and labor is thereby lost."

The Synod's resolution not to alter the new Pennsylvania hymnbook (p. 29) does not exactly redound to its special honor, since this is a clear proof that it will neither recognize nor correct its blunders already publicly censured.

With regard to the Sunday-school hymnbook the President of the Synod asks: "Would it not serve the welfare of our Church, as also of the Reformed, if these two sister churches should issue a common one, which might also be so arranged that it could likewise be used by itself in each church?" (p. 13.) Here all the synodical members, if they would be Lutheran at all, ought unanimously to have answered with a decided No. How the hymnbook is to be so arranged that it could be used alone in each church is a riddle to me, for the solution of which I would be willing to set a high price; for either one part of the hymnbook would have to be intended for the Lutherans alone, and the other for the Reformed alone. But then the Reformed would remain nevertheless in their error and the Lutherans fall from their truth; or the poison of false doctrine would have to be drawn out of the whole book, on which, however, all the art of the most famous chemists would fail. Nevertheless the Synod has committed to a committee the execution of this feat of art and has instructed it to confer for that purpose with the High German Reformed Synod. (p. 17.)

But what is one to say of the levity with which the Synod has dealt with and decided upon the "grave accusations against Candidate Brandt," the then leader of the Emigrant Church in New-York? What has it done with the three letters which it had received in this matter from credible witnesses, namely from a Luth. pastor, an agent of the German Society and a public notary? The Synod adopted the committee's report, in which it is said among other things: "that the accusation against him has its origin in things which stand in no direct connection with his mission, but in business negotiation which he undertook for emigrants, and which, as it appears, contain nothing criminal." (p. 24.) If, then, a preacher, e.g., cheats people not precisely in the church, before the altar or in the pulpit, but outside the church in other houses or on the street or on ships, that stands in "no direct connection with his office," but such things are to be regarded as "business negotiations"! And even though the most obvious proofs of all sorts of frauds lie before them, these are yet, "as it appears," to contain "nothing criminal." But that appearances deceive, of that no one has thought in the remotest degree. That is a language such as truly is not to be expected from a Luth. Synod. Did not a single member, then, think of the requirement which God's holy Word lays upon the servants of God with regard to their life, e.g. 1 Timoth. 3, 1—10, Titus 1, 5—11? For there we read: "A bishop or pastor must be blameless, not given to filthy lucre, not greedy of filthy lucre; moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." If the Synod would fulfil its duty, it must lay before Candidate Brandt, who was moreover present, the accusations point for point, and investigate whether and in what respect he would be in a position to refute the testimonies of those men as unfounded, or wherein they retained the right against him. The Synod ought then to have published without delay the result of this investigation and either rescued the honest name of this its member or, in the opposite case, thanked those men for their discovery of the wickedness, excluded Candidate Brandt from its synodical connection, and warned against him and all his doings. But now it has even granted him a further assistance of 200 dollars (p. 39) and thus by word and deed made itself partaker of other men's sins.

As lamentable as such abuses are, so gratifying on the other hand is much that occurs in that report.

Gratifying, namely, is the disposition of the Synod with regard to the more general spread of the Bible, in which intention the formation of auxiliary societies was proposed (p. 57). Only it were to be wished in this that the Synod would choose an edition of the Bible which really deserves the name Lutheran, namely with the addition of the Apocryphal books and with a really purely Lutheran text, both of which, as is well known, are sought in vain in the editions issued by English and American Bible societies. If the Lutherans do not soon put their hand to the work to provide for a Bible edition cleansed of the many alterations that have crept in, it will come about in a short time that they themselves no longer know which is the genuine Lutheran translation.

I call attention here to two important literary productions which we have to thank Dr. Hopf in Nuremberg for. The one is his appreciation of the Lutheran German version of the Bible, the other a new edition of the German Bible revised by Luther himself in the year 1545, of which some installments have already appeared.

Very commendable, finally, is also the synodical resolution "that a committee be appointed to prepare a short yet sufficient explanation of the five chief parts of the Luth. Catechism in questions and answers with Scripture passages appended, and to bring it to the press, yet so that this explanation be so arranged that it shall not displace the use of the Catechism." (p. 31.) The more those charged with it recognize the importance, but also the manifold difficulties of this task, the more conscientiously will they go to the preparation for this work, and especially make a strict sifting of the existing helps, among which those from the time of Luther, and in particular his large Catechism, deserve unconditionally the preference over most of the later ones.

(Communicated.)

Introduction of the Lutheran Order of Service in B.

Grace and peace in Christ! My beloved Brother, you wonder that I write such a greeting above my letter, since it is not at all customary any more. I once read in an old book that Christians should put such a greeting at the head, when they write to Christians, and indeed for this reason, that they should distinguish themselves also in this from the children of this world; but especially because in this greeting of Paul all good is wished that we can wish for ourselves. Grace, namely, is the forgiveness of sin, and peace is the rest of the conscience, which is where forgiveness of sin is. But what I really wanted to write you is this. Since the first Advent we have the old beautiful Lutheran service in our church. You will wonder that this was not always so with us, and I wondered too when I came hither; for we are not accustomed to anything else. But now most of the people here are not accustomed to anything of the kind.

For in Germany it is no longer so in many places, especially since the Union was introduced. The former pastor had his hands full with other quarrels, as with the struggle against the Reformed and secret societies; he had above all to show what the Lutheran doctrine really is; therefore he could not possibly get around to introducing the Lu-