# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1849 07 10_S182
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

182

shows itself constantly refractory and yields to the pastor's demands, founded in God's Word, only where it sees its own advantage, but ever again breaks its promises, even those given in writing, as soon as it thinks it no longer needs the pastor, and then itself gives him notice of service?

Answer: Yes! Such a congregation makes itself unworthy to hear God's Word.

3rd question:

How shall a preacher proceed, when a member of his congregation accuses another of having committed a crime, and especially when the accused denies the deed and appeals to witnesses?

Answer: The truth is in any case to be ascertained, but a judgment is never to be pronounced upon a mere supposition, since this would be altogether contrary to Zechariah 8, 7. If, therefore, witnesses are named, these shall be heard, and decision is to be made according to their testimony. He who is thereafter found guilty comes under church discipline. — But if it proves that the witnesses are the cause of the accusation, although they can testify nothing certain, then these, as slanderers, must be taken under church discipline, provided they belong to the congregation.

Ludwig W. Habel,
as Secretary.

(Communicated.) *)

Whether the Union, as one so frequently hears it defended, is right or not? And whether the Union is right at all?

It has happened to me that I was together with such as declared themselves for the Union, and the conversation turned to this subject. I had at that time not yet declared myself publicly against the Union, because I, having grown up in Germany in the united Church of Prussia, still lived in contradiction with myself and did not rightly know what I should do. And I would perhaps well have remained in the Union, had I not recognized it as a veil or cloak spread over the conscience. A question of conscience, it is my opinion, it must become, if one wishes to attain certainty on this question. According to my conscience, however, I have never denied that the Lutheran doctrine is the right one, grounded in God's Word. If voices were raised against it, I confessed the truth I had recognized. If it came to the Union, I could grant it to be right only in the truth; yet there was also a time when I let my conscience be persuaded by the authority of others that the points of difference between the Reformed and Lutheran doctrine were not fundamental and that a Union could therefore take place nevertheless. When, upon careful examination before my Lord and God, I became doubtful of this again, the conversation mentioned above took place. Those with whom I spoke were wont to perceive at once in my utterances an "exclusive" Lutheran, and I noticed in them a peculiar manner, which I knew well from my own experience, when I, namely, in answer to their question whether I then thought that the Union was not willed by God, answered: yes, certainly God wills the Union, but only in the truth. To this it was then replied: yes, so it is, the Union must take place and exist in God's Word. I rejoined: one must then only not leave out of account that, with the different doctrines, the question always forced itself upon us for decision: which is right and which is false? Thereupon the conversation was broken off. And here is precisely the point which the flesh flees. In God's Word, in the truth, there is to be union; but nothing comes of it, because one is not in earnest with the matter, prefers to lean upon authorities and pretends thereby to be able to quiet oneself, and yet there is no rest and no peace.

I said above: I hold that it must become a matter of conscience with this question. By this I mean, first: the conscience must become free from the bonds of the widespread opinion in favor of the Union; for this opinion, which says: "Union is right, is something beautiful, how should God not will it!" this opinion is just an opinion; but all opinions one should not acknowledge as binding upon the conscience; for sin has, as is well known, corrupted not only the will, but also the power of thought and judgment. But that that opinion frequently becomes a bond upon the conscience, of this no one can doubt. The right bonds of conscience, however, God Himself always lays upon us in His Word. These bonds we should love and hold dear, and in them we become truly free. Thus, for example, my conscience should let itself be firmly bound by the commandment: "Thou shalt not steal." So it is also with the whole Word of God, that it binds our consciences and thereby makes them truly, preciously and heavenly free. With this, however, it agrees not at all when it is said in a united church or congregational constitution in St. Louis: We confess ourselves to the Reformed and Lutheran symbolical writings, so far as they agree. But in the points where they do not agree, we avail ourselves of the praised, dearly won freedom of conscience, that is, that each one proceed therein according to his conscience. — That is indeed very fine, that each one is to proceed according to his conscience. But if it now happens that the one has the Lutheran doctrine and holds it according to his conscience, and the other the Reformed, and both contradict each other, as they really do: dear brethren! is it not so, that the conscience of the one must err? Now you will surely not say that an erring conscience is something good and beautiful, nor that it must and shall remain in error: behold, thus you may not say that it is freedom of conscience, and you avail yourselves of freedom of conscience. The only thing you could say with right would be that you confessed: we have in this point no certainty; then, however, conscience would urge you to seek it, and the LORD God would give it to you. For this you will surely never say, that it would be freedom of conscience to be and to remain uncertain in a point of the Christian doctrine of salvation. It is indeed nothing agreeable to recognize as something wrong and to alter that to which we have publicly confessed; yet it would seem that with you in this matter it is absolutely necessary. At least I know not how otherwise you wish to have a good and free conscience.

Whether such a Union, where one does thus, is right or not, need no more be said. We might, however, still adduce for consideration that such a Union establishes a fellowship in which not even the most important thing, the doctrine of salvation, is common to all, in which contradictions are tolerated.

Whether the Union is right at all? — Every instructed Christian knows that the Christian Church is a union, a fellowship, and that it is God's good pleasure that has made this Church and still always preserves it, and gathers, enlightens, sanctifies its members and keeps them with Jesus Christ. But when "Union" is spoken of in common life, everyone understands thereby the Union above mentioned, in which the difference of doctrine is to count for nothing. This, however, is to be rejected and, as everyone may convince himself, is not well-pleasing to God, but displeasing and an abomination. — But if, in spite of all this, anyone says: Behold, they cry again: "we are the right Church," to him let the reference to our doctrine of the Church serve; and let him refute it or give a better.

S. Buttermann,
ev.-luth. Pastor.

When I had just written this down, the united paper, "Amerikanischer Botschafter," No. 7 of July, came into my hands. It is remarkable how these people can set themselves above history and above the confessions, which yet are historical facts of an influence upon the whole age. In that paper stands a poem entitled "the Church that alone saves." In the note to this title it is said, among other things, that this poem "combats only the error, still ever so widespread, even among Protestants, that one thinks, because he is a member of a church fellowship, he is also a member of the true Church; and that a single congregation or an outward union

*) This communication came to us only two days after the arrival of the letter in which we were given news of the blessed death of the dear sender, Pastor Buttermann. From the private letter accompanying the communication we see that the dear man felt himself constrained to write down the above only two days before his death. It rejoices us to be able to lay the same before our readers as a confession of his own mouth against the so-called Union and for the Lutheran Church. Ed.