# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1855 05 08_S149
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

149

would be a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent.”

The wings are given to the woman: for from now on the Church appears in a form which she did not have even in the worst days of bloody persecutions in heathen times. Only sighing could she eke out her existence on earth. But nevertheless the faith was not stifled; rather it now took its highest flight: the glow of its longing for the home from which it sprang mingled the clouds of incense of mighty prayers with the jubilation of the heavenly hosts and fed on the testimonies which had been forsaken in the ruling Church (fled “into the wilderness”). Thus “she” always found “her place” and was also nourished. And that happened “from the face of the serpent,” in the midst of the Papacy: for however sharp the eye of the enemy was, yet the eyes of Christ, “the great eagle,” were sharper, who even in this time watched over his chicks and lent them his wings.

It is to be noted that in this passage, which in its content is the same as v. 6, the 1260 days are called “a time, and times, and half a time.” Some understand by this prophetic years, so that every day of the common year is again a year and so 360 years come to one prophetic year. That then gives 1, 360 years. 2, 2 times 360 are 720 years. 3, ½ times 360 is 180 years: total 1260. So it agrees then in the best way with the 1260 days, which are also prophetic days, that is, years. The 3½ also remind one of Chap. 11, 9 and the comforting prophecy Dan. 9, 27: In the midst of the week etc., that is, that the Papacy shall suddenly come to an end when the abomination has risen to its height. Finally, God here measures the time by the clock of faith, which waits, because it knows it lasts only “a time,” is long practiced in such waiting, so that the time of tribulation is doubled and stretched beyond measure (“times”), but at last, when it still seems to be in the midst of danger, before it is aware, is rescued “in a short time” (“half a time”). However we may now interpret it, it remains always a wonderful saying, and we may rightly say with Daniel, who first heard it: “And I heard, but I understood not” (Dan. 12, 7–8).

V. 15. “And the serpent cast out of his mouth water as a flood after the woman, that he might cause her to be carried away of the flood.”

After the stakes were driven in, the devil built upon them. At first the Papacy had enough to do to nestle itself in as idolatry and supreme power; peculiar false doctrines it did not yet bring forth then. But when the first new article of faith had been firmly established, that the Pope had power to decree and to order what he would, a host of false doctrines came after. That is to be understood by the “water” which the serpent cast after the woman: for with these false doctrines Satan wished utterly to drown the true Church (cf. 2 Cor. 11, 3), as indeed the truth also was publicly buried beneath them.

Before the world this looked again as if the new doctrines, by virtue of apostolic tradition, flowed directly down from heaven, to make the field of the Church fruitful like a gracious rain. Whoever had said that the notions of the holy Father were a water-flood which the serpent shot out of his mouth to “drown” the Church, he would have had to be the devil in person and the true Antichrist.

V. 16. “And the earth helped the woman, and the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth.”

As water seeps away in the earth, so the papistic false doctrines had no power to endure; whereas the stream of the evangelical truth, although its bed is deep and overhung by the high banks of human wisdom, flows on quietly as before. But as long as the deluge of antichristian lies lasted, only those perished in it who would not forsake the “earth” and who scorned the shelter in the safe ark.

V. 17. “And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.”

The Papacy became of itself a hindrance to the Church, since through idolatry and lies, without bending a hair on any believer, so far as lay in it, it fought against God’s children. From this side its enmity against God has been described hitherto. Now follows, thirdly, a description of how this enmity has also broken out in particular against those who still remained true to the truth. Here it is mentioned before all else as a great wonder that the woman has kept a remnant of her seed. These disturb the Antichrist in his rest. Why? They are only remains, more a monument of victory than that he need fear them. Without them it would have been forgotten what Satan’s power can accomplish on earth. It is indeed also a wonder, but one which must bear witness precisely to the power of faith and the powerlessness of the Papacy: for if it fears these remnants, tracks them down in order to destroy them with fire and sword or by anathemas, how will it not tremble before the woman herself, and gnash its teeth on the last day, when it is judged by Christ, because it hated in the woman “the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ”?

Lutheranism in Texas once more.

With reference to the report which we gave in No. 15 about Lutheranism in Texas, Mr. Anstädt writes in his “Kirchenbote” as follows: “It is a pity that Mr. Walther must also use this occasion to give the dear brethren of the Texas Synod a repeated dig in the ribs, since they stand in much greater need of our brotherly sympathy and Christian intercession.” In what follows Mr. A. calls what we have said even something “shameful.”

It cannot, of course, occur to us to wish to justify our remarks about the position of the Texas Synod before the “Kirchenbote” and to satisfy the same, since the “Kirchenbote” is notoriously far more unfaithful to the Church whose name it bears, indeed combats the very same as its enemy precisely in its distinctive doctrines. For the sake of other readers, however, it may be of interest if we place the character of that synod somewhat further in the light.

As we see from the “Lutheran Standard,” the Texas Synod held its meeting this year on the 28th of April and the following days, and has now declared itself so plainly in the minutes published about it that everyone can judge whether we have done it wrong by our judgment about its position toward our Lutheran Church, or not. To cite only some things in proof, it is said in the opening address delivered by Pastor Wendt, among other things, as follows:

“In agreement with a resolution of our synod I published in the Wesleyan Banner (a Methodist periodical) the principles of our Church and declared at the same time on this occasion that we cherished a brotherly and peaceable spirit toward all denominations which stood with us on the common ground of the Word of God . . . . When I recall our union with this honorable body” (the General Synod), “I feel constrained to express again my joy that we no longer stand alone, but belong to the great family of our Church.*) God grant that this bond of union may become ever firmer and closer through the love of Jesus and that it may be preserved free from all errors of sectarianism, but stand fast on the holy foundation of the Word of God**) . . . . The unevangelical congregations of Fredericksburg and New Braunfels accused us before the Consistorial Council of the Grand Duchy of Baden of having unfurled the banner of Old Lutheranism in the most exaggerated manner and of having stirred up strife and discord in the congregations which had already been organized, instead of preaching the Gospel to the neglected congregations. To this I replied to the Consistorial Council . . . That we are not Old Lutherans is sufficiently proved by the fact of our union with the General Synod . . . Mr. Spittler wrote me that the accusations had been sent to him

*) Whoever, then, does not belong to the General Synod goes about as a prodigal son outside the proper Father’s house, even if it were a whole synod! Ed.

**) Why, one wonders, does Mr. Wendt declare the General Synod precisely free from all sectarianism and standing on God’s Word? — Probably for this reason, because it accepts the Augsburg Confession only, as it says, as to the main substance (as substantialy correct) and is so liberal as to close one eye, even if one believes certain “side matters,” e.g. the presence of Christ in the Holy Supper, provided that one keeps nicely quiet in such a belief in side issues and shows oneself worthy of the most graciously granted toleration. Ed.