# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1850 05 14_S151
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

151

Roman church teaches, whether it be written or not. What a confusion of ideas, what ignorance, or else what great wickedness. Since Mr. Theophilus is a Unionist, we will assume for his own good that he does not know at all the difference between tradition and symbols; but then he ought not, if he himself wishes to be as humble a Christian as he praises Mr. Weyl for being, to have entered into a dispute about things unknown to him, nor to have been so boastful. And how could he so unconscionably slander the Formula of Concord, whose first page he evidently has not read. For there it says literally at the outset:

“We believe, teach and confess that the only rule and standard, according to which at the same time all doctrines and teachers are to be judged and decided, are none other than the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testament, as it is written: Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path, Ps. 119, 105.; and St. Paul: Though an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you, let him be accursed, Gal. 1, 8. — Other writings of ancient and modern teachers, whatever name they bear, are not to be held equal to the Holy Scripture, but all together are to be subjected to it, and are not to be received otherwise or further than as witnesses, showing in what manner and at what places, after the time of the apostles, such doctrine of the prophets and apostles was preserved. — And since immediately after the time of the apostles, even in their lifetime, false teachers and heretics crept in, and against them symbols, that is, short, round confessions, were set up in the first church, which were held to be the unanimous, universal Christian faith and the confession of the orthodox and true church, namely the Apostolic Symbol, the Nicene Symbol and that of Athanasius, so we confess ourselves to the same and hereby reject all heresies and doctrines which have been introduced into the church of God contrary to them. — But as regards the divisions in matters of faith which have arisen in our times, we hold as the unanimous consensus and declaration of our Christian faith and confession, especially against the papacy and its false worship, idolatry, superstition and other sects, as our symbol in this time the first unaltered Augsburg Confession, which was delivered to Emperor Charles the Fifth at Augsburg in the year 1530 in the great diet of the empire, together with its Apology and the Articles which were drawn up at Smalcald in the year 1537 and subscribed at that time by the most eminent theologians. And because such matters also concern the common laity and the salvation of their souls, we confess ourselves also to the large and small Catechism of Dr. Luther, as both these Catechisms are comprised in the works of Luther, as to the layman's Bible, in which everything is comprehended that is treated at length in the Holy Scripture and that is necessary for a Christian man to know for his salvation. According to this guidance, as mentioned above, all doctrines are to be arranged, and whatever is contrary to it, as opposed to the unanimous declaration of our faith, is to be rejected and condemned. — In this manner the distinction between the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testament and all other writings is preserved, and the Holy Scripture alone remains the only judge, rule and standard, according to which, as the only touchstone, all doctrines shall and must be known and judged, whether they be good or evil, right or wrong. — But the other symbols and writings cited are not judges, as the Holy Scripture is, but only a testimony and declaration of the faith, as at all times the Holy Scripture in controverted articles has been understood and expounded in the church of God by those then living, and the contrary doctrine rejected and condemned.” —

Ah, if only Mr. Theophilus had first read and understood this, he could have spared himself his bold challenge, then he would at least know what symbols are, and could at most still dispute whether the Holy Scripture has really been rightly understood and apprehended in the Lutheran symbols. And if he would then conscientiously lay the sole rule and standard, the written Word of God, to our confession, and pray the Holy Ghost for enlightenment, he might yet come to the knowledge of his Unionist errors, and would yet learn to understand why we bind ourselves to our symbols, namely because they agree with the one written Word of God, and why we testify against the false doctrine of the Unionists and Reformed, namely because it does not agree with the Holy Scripture and is therefore false. So he would also have to recognize that with his first conclusion against us he has only revealed his ignorance, and by no means put us simple Lutherans into embarrassment. No, Mr. Theophilus, the reason why we condemn the Unionist and Reformed error does not lie in our inconsistent condemnation-mania, but in this, that it is written in the Scripture: this is my body, and so because the Reformed contradict the clear Scripture, and the Unionists are still worse and are wholly silent about it and ask with Pilate: what is truth? — After this the second conclusion also falls to nothing. Mr. Theophilus namely, in a certain hope of victory, has already trumpeted beforehand what he means to answer us, if from fear of being counted Romans we should acknowledge the Holy Scripture as the sole rule and standard of doctrine. He calls to us: let us then all (understand: Unionists, Reformed, etc.) who sincerely accept this standard, reach each other the hand of peace, no longer serve unbelief for mockery and nourishment, and deny the name of a Christian church to no church that does this. O Theophilus, hadst thou but kept silent! We have indeed strife with the Unionists and Reformed only for this reason, that they do not sincerely accept the Holy Scripture as the standard of faith and doctrine, and they have stirred up this strife and cherish it. — What else occurs in the epistle of Mr. Theophilus, namely his gross sin against the 8th commandment, in that he scatters abroad evil, ambiguous and slanderous rumors about us, and afterwards first asks us whether they are also true, that we will reckon to his Unionist blindness and to his erring love for the Union brethren, and pray God for him for forgiveness and enlightenment. — Finally we beg him not again to call our upright “Lutheraner” of St. Louis a half-brother of the Weyl Kirchenbote. The simple, true-hearted Lutheran church knows nothing of such half brotherhoods. But that Mr. Weyl is not Lutheran he also proves clearly again by letting himself be praised for regarding the distinctive doctrines between the Lutherans and the Reformed and Unionists as side issues, whereas even in Luther's Small Catechism, in the sixth chief part, the Lord's Supper, for example, is treated, as is well known, and that on the ground of the Scripture, seeing that the Sacrament of the Altar is a blessed means of grace, and therefore an error which undermines the scriptural doctrine of the Lord's Supper must be recognized by every simple Christian believer as one dangerous to souls. —

August Crämer.

(Sent in.)

A Conversation about California.

A. “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin.” (Rom. 14, 23.) Dost thou believe that?

B. Yes, of course. What Christian will deny it?

A. Is that thy whole, full earnest?

B. Why dost thou doubt?

A. Because thou wilt go to California.

B. Well, can one not go there also in faith?

A. Let me hear then, in what faith thou thinkest to go.

B. Why, I rely upon no one else but God. Dost thou think I do not know that everything depends on His blessing? I cannot vouch that I shall remain alive, that I shall have luck, that I shall be able to come back, that I shall find mine own well and in health again: but God can. That I believe, on that I venture it, and that is my faith. What hast thou to object to that?

A. Dost thou then think that one may take comfort in God's protection and assistance in one case as in another?

B. In which not?

A. For example, when one has in hand something that comes from an impure source.

B. I hope, however, that thou wilt not impute impure motives to my well-considered purpose. That many, many may go there in no Christian disposition, that I grant thee without contradiction, but of thy friend thou shouldst think a little better.

A. What drives thee then?

B. To say it briefly, nothing but poverty. Thou knowest that I am neither wasteful nor lazy; yet I cannot get out of the making of debts and the paying of debts. And I do not readily apply to anyone, but neither will I break my word. Over this, however, I have come into such straits that hardly anyone will believe it. And if it had only grown a little better by degrees! no, it has become worse and worse. Three years ago it began, the misfortune, and has not let up until now. First, I had lent my well-saved money to an unfaithful friend, secondly came the long illness of my wife, then I was burnt out, then came the wet summer that robbed me of the whole harvest, then the cattle plague —

A. Enough, enough. I know that thou hast been dealt with especially hard. But is then the journey to California the way by which thou art to be helped?