# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1848 10 17_S27
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

27

show them that they are in error. He must inform them further how those customs and ways rejected by them are older than Popery and date from the best time of the Church; how, moreover, the crucifix is a mute yet mighty sermon of the Crucified, and the sign of the cross no less a lovely remembrance of Him and a sign of the confession of Him, and for that reason is significant and edifying for the simple, believing Christian. That among the Roman Catholics, however, error and abuse have attached themselves thereto, as though it were no sin to show to the crucifix and images of saints a kind of special veneration for the sake of the persons represented, and as though the sign of the cross and other ceremonies were of equal essence with the pure preaching of the divine Word, — that takes nothing away from their edifying quality and from their lovely power and significance, which awakens devotion and strengthens it, provided only that the pure evangelical doctrine concerning these things indifferent be in vogue; the abuse of them surely nowhere and never does away with the right use; and since between the papistic and the Lutheran doctrine of the Church a far greater gulf is fixed than between the latter and the Reformed, there is much less danger of falling, through the adoption of those customs, into the appearance of being Romish, than, through the imitation of Reformed ceremonies, into the suspicion of approving the Reformed doctrine; and this latter suspicion lies so much the nearer, since on this side and that the false, unscriptural Union between Lutherans and Reformed is being pursued so zealously. If, however, in spite of all this correction, those Lutherans remain by their old assertion, that those and similar customs of divine service are once for all and remain "unscriptural and papistic," and that it is therefore sin to introduce them, and if they persist — no longer now in ignorance,*) but in wickedness — in this proposition: then the preacher and that part of the congregation which is of one mind with him shall not and may not yield to them, and must rather let it be that they separate; for if they yielded to them, they would sin in the following manner:

First, they would give the appearance as though they approved that false assertion, that the above ceremonies are "unscriptural and papistic, and that it is sin to adopt them." But thereby they would confirm a false doctrine, since essentially only that is sin which is contrary to God's commandments. Ceremonies, however, in so far as they are not contrary to Scripture (as, for example, the Roman sacrifice of the Mass), are things indifferent, which God has neither commanded nor forbidden to the Christian Church and which, without injury to the conscience, may be kept or omitted according to circumstances. But whoever made the keeping or omitting of them in itself either a law, or a sin, would obscure and distort first of all the evangelical doctrine of Christian liberty and thereby pollute the whole body of doctrine.

Second, they would by that yielding confirm not only the false doctrine mentioned, and thus sin against God's Word and the pure doctrine, but they would at the same time in fact sell, for the sake of pleasing men, the noble, precious treasure of their evangelical liberty and become servants of men. For this would undeniably happen, in deed and in truth, if they let the adoption of those ceremonies, which are not sin but are subject to evangelical liberty, be made a sin for themselves.

Third, they would strengthen their opponents in their wilfulness and their wickedness and cut off from them the opportunity of coming, from this side also, to the knowledge of their sin and to true evangelical enlightenment.

Fourth, they would give to the confessionally faithful and evangelically clear Lutherans of their own and other congregations, by such sinful weakness and man-pleasing, no small offense.

Finally, however, it might also easily happen that by their silence and yielding they would be helpful to the adversaries in violating the article of justification; for whoever, for example, holds the adoption of those customs to be sin contrary to the Holy Scripture, holds the omission of them just as readily to be something meritorious, and sets up, though for the present silently and in secret, a kind of merits of our own beside the merit of Christ.

Now if those Lutherans in Detroit who separated from the congregation on account of the crucifix, the burning candles, and the like, objected in the last-mentioned manner and have remained therein despite sufficient instruction: then it has happened right according to their evil will that they were not yielded to; and whether they now wither away singly or fall to this or that sect or form a new one, the preacher and the congregation — be this the majority or the minority — are excused; their blood be upon their own head. But should the first case above mentioned occur, that the discontented had refused the immediate adoption of those customs more from ignorance and unaccustomedness, without raising and maintaining the accusation that the latter are "unscriptural and papistic": — then the preacher and those of like mind would have sinned grievously against them and wounded their weak conscience, grossly offended against love, asserted their own liberty in a fleshly manner, wilfully caused division and separation, rent the body of Christ, and bitterly offended and grieved the true and faithful Lutherans who see and hear such things.

And we, too, the so-called Old Lutherans of the Missouri-Ohio Synod, desire most earnestly to have raised our testimony in this matter, since we would have to reject that manner of acting as thoroughly unchristian, unevangelical, and unlutheran; yea, we could not recognize the guilty as genuine and unfeigned brothers again until they had heartily begged the offended for forgiveness and, so far as in them lies, had restored peace and contributed their part to fraternal reconciliation and the healing of the breach.

Yes, we would then have to agree with Dr. Kurtz (although we must reject him, almost summarily, as the spokesman of the "false brethren," that is, of the so-called Lutheran General Synod, fallen away from the pure Lutheran doctrine and into the false Reformed), that through that unjust manner of acting the offended all the more easily fall into the nets and snares of the spiritual partisans and freebooters, and especially of the German Methodists, and the Lutheran church in Detroit, through unwise, fleshly zeal, thus destroys itself.

For our part we hope, by this essay, partly to have cleared ourselves of the possible suspicion that we (as so-called Old Lutherans) likewise approved and followed that censured manner of acting and placed the essence of the Lutheran Church in the swiftest possible setting up, even if done in an unevangelical way, of old Lutheran churchly ceremonies; partly we hope to have informed our own people and other sincere and truth-loving readers somewhat more closely concerning the most important article of Christian liberty and the principled procedure in its practical application to churchly ceremonies.

As to the poor innocent crucifix in particular, or an image of Christ on the cross and the like, which in the mouth of Dr. Kurtz must so unjustly bear the guilt of Popery, it is evident from this how Dr. Kurtz and his followers have fallen prey to the false spirituality of the Reformed also in this matter and have lost the sound evangelical eye of genuine Lutherans. Moreover, we should wish for them and for ourselves from our heart that we might paint before the eyes of our congregations this highest act of love of God through the crucifixion of His Son in the Word (though in a succession) as well, and bring it to living contemplation, as the plastic art does in the crucifix all at once.

Would to God the writer of this had been able to find with his bodily and spiritual eye on an existing crucifix a point of rest and refreshment, when his soul, even in English and German Lutheran churches, through the long flood of words of this or that glib spiritual speechmaker, whose beginning and end was by no means the Crucified, was wearied unto death and faint! —

Finally, we should like to commend to the Doctor of Divinity, Mr. B. Kurtz, the article of Christian liberty and its right application in things indifferent and especially in churchly ceremonies, for somewhat more exact study and for the perfecting of his theological learning, as likewise for honest consideration, most urgently. For in the

*) Naturally, however, the instruction concerning this must be given not merely once, but repeatedly, and the pastor must seek, by questions and answers, to ascertain as carefully as possible the state of knowledge of the individuals, in case these permit it.