# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1853 08 30_S2
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

2

that the slight testimony of our little paper for the pure evangelical truth against human wit and delusion has been visibly blessed beyond what we asked or understood, richly and gloriously. For from many quarters we have received testimonies that the struggle which the "Lutheraner" has fought in the time last past has brought to clearness many a one who was involved in obscurity over the important points of doctrine concerned, has strengthened others in the truth already recognized, and has in general stirred up many to search further in God's Word and in the old core writings of our Church. The most gratifying thing of all to us is finally the observation that even our adversaries have not gone away wholly empty from the blessing of the testimony given for the truth in our paper. Their hostile disposition and their bitterness against us have indeed remained the same, but it cannot escape the attentive observer that, as regards the disputed doctrines and the recognition of a practice founded upon them (without admitting it, to be sure, but in fact), they have begun an open retreat, and therefore now soften as far as possible much that they had before defended in the most extreme manner and pushed to the point, and now gladly consent when one concedes to them that perhaps they did not mean it as they wrote it earlier. Surely, if the congregations that are led by our opponents knew what influence our testimony has already exercised upon the latter, from what burdens it has already freed them, the congregations, from what paths of error already entered upon it has already called back and drawn back their leaders: they would never consent, together with their pastors, to condemn and curse us (as, alas, they have done) as their enemies and as destroyers of the Church of God in fearful wickedness, but would rather thank God that He has raised us up to cry "Halt!" to their blinded pastors, so that these at least have not fallen into still greater errors than has happened. Let our opponents deny, however they may, this blessing of our struggle against them, which they themselves enjoy against their will: we praise God for it. That Day will make clear whither it would have come in the Lutheran Church of America, if a Romanizing tendency, pursued with such fanaticism and with such energy as a Grabau has here taken up, had found no strong resistance. May only the LORD, who alone can change hearts, help that our opponents may at last learn to recognize with wholesome alarm with what terrible guilt they have burdened themselves by their immoderate banning, judging, condemning and cursing, and may they at last turn back and betake themselves with us to living in the one old evangelical truth and in peace. —

As to the manner in which the "Lutheraner", if it please God, intends to conduct itself in the future, we can give the dear reader an assurance which, as we hope, is a pleasing one. The "Lutheraner" will, namely, undergo a not inconsiderable change. Our Synod, during its last sessions at Cleveland in the month of June of this year, adopted the resolution to publish, besides the "Lutheraner," a second periodical, a theological monthly. Since the "Lutheraner" was until now the only public organ of our Synod, it has hitherto had to take in much that was often digestible only to a smaller part of the readers, e.g. many controversies and developments of doctrine, which could interest almost only the preachers who read other periodicals besides. This inconvenience and evil is now remedied. From now on the "Lutheraner" will make it strictly its task to furnish only such essays and news as are intelligible and of interest to every reader. The necessary arrangements have also been made to make it possible that the "Lutheraner" may soon communicate to its readers the most important events in the church field of our old fatherland from immediate sources. Otherwise the paper will, in general, strictly hold fast to its hitherto peculiar character, of being a paper first of all for doctrine and defense.

But since, as it says in that hymn: "Our strength is mere weakness," the Christian reader is herewith, in conclusion, earnestly asked to include also the dear "Lutheraner" in his devout Lord's Prayer.

Amen.

(For the "Lutheraner.")

The following may, although it is delayed by an accident, still not be uninteresting to the readers of the Lutheraner even now.

It concerns, namely, an editorial article in the January number of this year of the Evang. Review, edited by the Doctors of Theology C. O. Krauth and W. M. Reynolds. It is headed "Church and Ministry," and contains a notice and review of the work published on the subject indicated by Prof. Walther by commission of the Synod of Missouri, etc.

To show on what occasion the work arose, the beginning and course of the doctrinal controversy is first set forth, which, as is known, was conducted first by some preachers in Missouri, and after a Synod of Missouri, etc., had been formed, by this Synod, against Pastor Grabau.

Then the author of the article expresses himself as follows about the book. "The whole work forms one of the most interesting contributions to our church literature that has yet been furnished by an American author. Prof. Walther is indeed a German by birth and the book is printed in Germany, but nevertheless it is in every respect an American book. It has not only come forth out of the state of things in this country and the movements in the Lutheran Church here, but it also sets Lutheranism in decided harmony with the liberality of American principles and institutions. We apprehend, indeed, that our friends of the Missouri Synod will not thank us for this compliment, and that the Buffalo people will point to it as a confirmation of their worst fears and a justification of their severest censure of Missourian principles, which they have suspected as 'radical,' 'democratic,' 'overturning the most approved principles of Lutheran church government,' and the like. But we answer, without any fear of reactionary conservatism hovering before our eyes, that the Reformation, as Luther began it and carried it out to its just consequences, was a 'radical' reform of all the abuses existing in the Church, 'democratic,' since it gave to all the right to judge for themselves, in that it made all Christians alike kings and priests of God, and thoroughly rejected and annihilated the despotism of a few priests over the conscience of men and the Word of God."

Now the Theses themselves are communicated, just as they are found in the book, nine on the Church and ten on the Ministry.

Thereafter it says: "With the views which are contained in these Theses in general, we agree entirely; especially we have nothing to object to the first nine, and rather believe that the doctrine of the Lutheran Church here set forth is the only correct one, and is equally scriptural and Lutheran." And further below: "With the Theses on the Church also we are for the most part agreed. The theory is strictly Luther's and is confirmed by the principles pronounced in the Symbols of the Church."

Now some exceptions follow. It says, namely, toward the end of the article: "Had we ourselves written these Theses, we would not have used the expression found in the fifth, 'the power of a spiritual court,' and would have preferred the more general expression 'the executive power of the Church in the administration of its discipline.'" This is argued on the ground that, since according to the tenth Thesis the right to judge doctrine, and therefore also to have seat and vote with the preachers in the church courts and councils, is conceded also to the laity, no special function remains to the preacher but the execution. The sender of this takes leave to remark against this that the preference seems to him due to the expression "spiritual court" used in the Thesis. For it not only connects with the manner of speech of the Apology, but is also the more significant. For it is meant, namely, that the circumstance be indicated at