# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1852 05 25_S158
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

158

logical opinion, that of the Regensburg theologian Wolfgang Waldner, is concerned, Pastor Grabau seeks to prove by it alone that the same does not speak for us, yes, that we have thereby "likewise deceived the readers of the Lutheraner," because the blessed Waldner speaks of good Christians who come from strange oppressed places; such good Christians, he says, they, the Prussian Lutherans, were indeed in Germany, but not the "mob-spirits" whom we had received. Probably Pastor Grabau did not consider in this that among these Prussian Lutherans, whom he himself once received, there were precisely several of those whom he now titles only mob-spirits. He will, to be sure, now say: "These wicked rogues first became manifest here; I received them at one time upon their hypocritical confession." But herewith he gives us ourselves our justification into our hands, if he and Pastor Winkler seek to put us to shame by proving to us that among those received by us also scabby sheep would be found.

Pastor Grabau, together with Pastor Winkler, ought to consider that the matter between us comes down in the end to the question: Who teaches purely according to God's Word, the symbolical books of our Lutheran Church, and the testimonies of Luther and of other enlightened teachers, whose orthodoxy we both acknowledge? If it becomes manifest that Pastor Grabau has defended against us the pure symbolical Lutheran doctrine, then it is beyond doubt that we must surrender and confess that in the reception of those banned by him or departed from him we have hardly sinned; although even then in ignorance, for God is our witness that neither personal hatred nor earthly advantage has moved us thereto, but solely the conviction that we dared not thrust from us those who separated themselves from those whom we ourselves perceive to be in dangerous and ruinous error. Or if it becomes manifest that Pastor Grabau, in the alleged Missourian mob-spirit business, has attacked, contested, and in every possible and conceivable way covered with scorn and mockery the old pure evangelical Lutheran doctrine: what then do all the demonstrations prove that some of those received by us and departed from them are wicked people?*) In the worst case for us, that we did not apply the necessary strictness in the reception of people who all allegedly departed from their former preacher, according to God's Word, for the sake of his false doctrine and have desired of us the dispensing of the means of grace; or that we pounced too quickly and did not first try everything to bring about unity in doctrine, before we widened the yawning rent still further by the reception of the separated.

*) It appears Pastor Grabau has already thought of this case, yes, even of this, that it could moreover be proved against him that he has banned wrongly. In the last number of the Informatorium one namely already begins to defend the principle: An unjust ban, if it should actually occur, is no false doctrine and gives no right to separation!" We remark, however, that this article is, contrary to rule, without the name of the author; he probably wishes to wait and see how the matter turns out. Evil omens!

Well then, the battle has broken out. With God's help we shall appear on the battlefield and let nothing turn us aside from the main matter. Even the cry of victory of our gentlemen opponents before the end of the battle will not confuse us, mindful of the saying of the wise Solomon: "Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof." Eccl. 7:9.

Pastor Winkler

avails himself in the 14th number of the Informatorium of so worthless and unchristian a polemic against us, the editor of the "Lutheraner," in that he insinuates to us willful lies and knavish evasions, that we see ourselves compelled to desist from all contest with this gentleman, since arguments against impudence accomplish as little as a sword against a certain other weapon. We are, God be thanked! not yet so far down that for the rescue of our good name we should need solemnly to defend ourselves against a man who with lawyerly dexterity tries to pin upon us the predicate of a liar. We call upon those who read the "Lutheraner" and the "Informatorium" to read our essay against Pastor Winkler and his answers comparatively, and then a defense on our part will not be needed with those who do not read Yes for No and No for Yes. Up to now, for lack of time after our return from Germany, we have been able to pay little attention to the Informatorium. This seems to make Pastor Winkler so eager for battle and presumptuous; but let him know, if God grant time and strength, we will faithfully make up all that has been neglected. We fear, on the other hand, that when the narrating of stories comes to an end with Pastor Winkler, a certain other, weightier material may have run out on the dear man and the great Goliath-sword have fallen from his hand. If, moreover, Pastor Winkler amends and lets some endeavor be seen at last to enter upon a Christian contest also, we promise to answer to him in everything, and also, where necessary, to reply to the reproach cited above as gently and Christianly as we composed our first answer. But if Pastor Winkler will continue to throw everything together in confusion, to represent wantonly every godless speech and deed of members of our congregations as a fruit of our doctrine and us as participants in it, to bespatter us from head to foot with the mire of his abusive speeches and then to cry out: Behold, such people are these!—then we shall never deem him worthy of an answer, but shall not trouble ourselves about him as a blasphemer who has become manifest and for that reason harmless, just as little as our old theologians troubled themselves about the many libels of the Jesuitical clamorers.

Would that Pastor Winkler would at last consider that his manner of contending produces, to be sure, for a time some desired impression, fills honest souls with misgivings against those attacked, and in particular works some malicious joy in unbroken hearts. But at last even the rude rabble becomes weary of watching such a game, while the children of God, on the other hand, soon become troubled and seek at last in the poisonous, confused strife something to which their poor tossed-about soul in temptation and the anguish of death can hold fast. But when at last this moment comes, then he who contended passionately, though he was at first often applauded, has lost, and he who in quietness sought to keep his conscience and above all strove not to shut against himself the open access to the throne of grace in the contest with men, has won.

God grant that Pastor Winkler may not be embittered also by this expectoration wrung from us, but rather be pacified; for, as said, for a Christian contest we declare ourselves ready; yes, we do not ourselves give up the hope that, if room is left for such a contest, an agreement and understanding, to the joy of the holy angels, to the comfort of the poor Church and to the honor of the Prince of Peace, is not impossible. But if no room is left for this, but every approaching word of peace is seized upon, interpreted and exploited as a confession of penitence, thus as a giving up of the recognized truth; every action charged by the opposing party as a reproach is branded from the outset by them as wanton wickedness; no possibility is conceded that what one thinks one must censure in the other may have been a work out of an erring conscience—: well then, let one do what one cannot leave undone and answer on the last day for the peace of the Church made impossible.

The Religion of the Atheists.

An atheist, or in German a denier of God, is necessarily at the same time an immoral man; if one can still call him a man at all, since he who seeks to extinguish the consciousness of God implanted in him by nature, and therefore denies all human dignity, has sunk down to the beast. Not all atheists, however, are bold enough to disclose their actual principles. The most, while they deny and blaspheme their Creator with a gay mouth, are withal so cowardly and so hypocrit-