# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1855 05 08_S150
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

150

by the Upper Church Council. At the same time the report of our union with the General Synod reached Basel, as a plain proof that we are not such stiff, dry Old Lutherans as we had been represented to be. Mr. Spittler sent the whole to the Upper Consistorial Council, which expressed its complete satisfaction with our procedure.”

We concede to the gentlemen in Texas that they have thoroughly cleared themselves of the suspicion of decided Lutheranism (for what is so-called Old Lutheranism other than that?), so thoroughly that even a rationalistic-unionistic church council could not refuse them this testimony.

(Sent in for the Lutheraner.)

Protest.

Under this name the Rev. A. Henkel at Germantown, Pa., has issued a pamphlet in the English language, in which he complains of the resolution passed by the Ev. Luth. Synod of Ohio last year, to receive in future no one into its fellowship who belongs to secret societies (Freemasons and Odd Fellows by name), and seeks to move the members of the synod to demand that at the next session that “odious resolution” be removed from the minutes.

Mr. Henkel thinks it is no consistent procedure on the part of the synod to resolve merely not to receive Freemasons and Odd Fellows in future, and not rather to expel at once those who belong to those secret societies. We agree with this; for one ought not only not to let wrong come in among oneself, but also to put it away from oneself, with this limitation, however, that the expulsion should take place not at once, but only after sufficient instruction and admonition which was not heeded.

The author then seeks, in order to attain the stated purpose of his pamphlet, to clear secret societies of suspicion and to recommend them. To this end he passes over the Holy Scripture. The sayings, e.g.: Every one that doeth evil hateth the light, and He that doeth truth cometh to the light, John 3, 20. 21. These prove, however, that secret societies are at the very least subject to the suspicion that they do evil. May a Christian, however, who is to avoid the appearance of evil, expose himself to such suspicion? Likewise the saying: What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light. Matt. 10, 17. From this we learn that the LORD was no dealer in mysteries, nor did he wish that his disciples should be such. He has left us an example, that we should follow his steps, and his commandments his disciples are to keep. Then the sayings: A man that is an heretick, after the first and second admonition reject. Tit. 3, 10, and If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed. For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds. 2 John 10 and 11. Now it is manifest that those secret societies receive and contain heretical men; for that they “accept the Bible” by no means secures them against it; the heretics do that also. Those, then, who belong to such secret societies do not act according to the Apostle’s word; on the contrary, they seek and cultivate fellowship with heretical men and call them brethren and are more intimate with them than with their own brethren in the faith. Where is the obedience to God’s Word then, and where is Christianity? After Mr. Henkel has thus passed over the Bible, he intimates that the whole blame for that resolution of the synod lies with preachers recently come from Europe, who, because there are some secret societies dangerous to state and religion in Europe and in this country, are filled with prejudice against all secret societies. The sensible reader, however, will credit both the “preachers come from Europe” and the native ones — with the exception, however, of Mr. Henkel, to be sure — with more knowledge of the Bible and faith than to let himself be persuaded that those are merely guided by prejudice and that these had taken no part at all in the synod’s attack on secret societies. In order now to cure “these dear brethren recently come from Europe” of their prejudice; so “the author” urges them not to forget that they do not know whether perhaps since time immemorial a secret society may have existed whose purpose may have been to preserve and hand down the Holy Scripture to posterity.” This society, he says, has perhaps hidden copies of the Holy Scripture in various places and still does so, to withdraw them from persecutors, and that must happen according to a secret plan, otherwise the hiding would be of no use. We do not doubt that Mr. Henkel with this argument perhaps has some success with childish readers and cures them of their so-called prejudice against secret societies. The author then further appeals to the fact that Luther and the symbolical books allow full freedom in the use of the laws, the order and the estates which obtain in the world, and maintain that the Church is not like any other external police. Against this the synod acts, however, in that it does not leave it free to its members to belong to secret societies. Mr. Henkel would have said something better if he had reminded himself and his readers that Scripture, Luther and the symbolical books allow and defend freedom for the good, but not for the evil. Finally the author cites the words of a man who has also got into the Freemason society and raves for it; and in order to give these words still more emphasis, the author adds: “that all Brigadier Generals of the War of Independence were Freemasons, excepting Benedict Arnold the traitor.” The author describes himself in his pamphlet as a Lutheran of the “old school.” It may be that the author has gone to school; but he seems not to have learned much. Moreover, we believe that the protest of Mr. Henkel will not wholly miss its purpose, that is, that “the Church should take the matter in hand”; but that it will contribute somewhat toward this, that at a coming session the inadmissibility of a Christian’s participation in secret societies will be discussed on the ground of Scripture and of the nature of those societies, and the resolution already passed be completed to the effect that also the members still in the synod, after the proper rebuke has been given them, if they refuse to forsake those fellowships, shall be excluded.

(Sent in by Pastor H.)

How parents should regard the holy Baptism in their children and accordingly look upon and treat them.

(From Scriver’s Seelenschatz, 3rd part, 6th sermon, § 22.)

You parents, love your children not chiefly because they are yours and sprung from your blood, because they are so pretty, lovely, clever, nimble, your little playthings and pastime, who give you much pleasure and joy; the Turks and heathen do this also; but because they are born of God through holy Baptism, cleansed by the blood of Jesus and filled with the Holy Spirit. Christian parents must not only love their children as flesh of their flesh, but also as members of Christ, as temples of the Holy Ghost; they must not so much love in them nature as grace, not so much their natural gifts and abilities as the impulse and the gifts of the Holy Spirit. One should look upon them not so much in the coat of many colors with which we have clothed them as in the robe of the righteousness of Jesus, which was put upon them in holy Baptism. One should also accustom them from youth up to this, that, when they are asked: My son, my daughter, what is thy greatest happiness and glory? thy best ornament, thy noblest treasure and highest honor? — they joyfully answer: That in holy Baptism I have become a child of God, a possession of my LORD Jesus and a temple of the Holy Spirit, an heir of heaven and of salvation. One should lead them to this, that they not only say this, but also believe it with their whole heart, and learn to despise in comparison with it all the world’s showy and splendid vanity. In this regard Christian parents must not hold their children light and must not deal unbecomingly with them in words and works. One finds many godless people who curse their children dreadfully, call them devil’s children, devil’s gizzards, devil’s brats, who with great fury and as if raving go at them like an embittered and enraged beast; beat them with fists, cudgels; throw plates at them, and whatever else they have at hand; drag them about by the hair, kick them with their feet; and that often happens when the children have least deserved it, whereas one, when one’s own head is otherwise in good order, can to them the