# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1846 08 17_S103
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

[Page 103]

the law demands it. — Whoever now enters a public church office must accept that office on the assumption that, through the next session of the Diet, even the last remnants of ecclesiastical order may be abolished.(*) The clerical estate has no right to vote in that assembly. — Ecclesiastical and church matters can nowadays be regulated by any and every person who possesses 6,000 thalers in property and has once been elected as a representative of the people."

The second reason which Mr. H. gives for his resignation from office is: "According to the will of Jesus, evangelical clergy are to exercise the office of the keys, both a loosing key and a binding key; but the latter has been taken from them, and thereby the former, too, has been crippled in its power" — or, as we might also put it: "All church discipline and church order has ceased." — "A church discipline," Mr. H. adds, "has existed in the Christian church from the beginning; it is grounded in the office of the keys which Christ gave to his servants, and it is publicly accepted in our own church as well, through the Augsburg Confession. It is exercised chiefly in this, that persons of manifestly immoral life — all public and impenitent sinners — are excluded from the fellowship of the church, and in particular from partaking of the Holy Supper, until they have done penance, have given certain signs of conversion and amendment, and have also sought the forgiveness of the church. It must weigh as a grave matter of conscience upon every Christian preacher when he finds himself compelled to administer the Sacrament even to those who, by their conduct, display an utter contempt for the divine commandments."(**) Clear is the prohibition he has given to his servants: "Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine." This sacrament, so it is stated in the General Articles, is dishonored not only by those who receive it unworthily, but also by those who administer it unworthily through negligence. — It can hardly be denied that with

(*) Mr. H. is referring here to the fact that a motion was made in the Diet that the obligation to our church's confessional writings be abolished, or at least altered, and that unrestricted freedom of doctrine be introduced in churches and schools. He writes that in one of the chambers of the Estates it was declared: "In matters of faith there is no higher judge than reason." One might almost, Mr. H. adds, be reminded regarding this chamber-chatter of Jesus's warning: "Wherefore if they shall say unto you, Behold, he is in the desert; go not forth: behold, he is in the secret chambers; believe it not."

(**) "For the sin of adultery there is, at most, a prison sentence of a few weeks; common fornication is entirely unpunished, so that my first Ephorus [district superintendent] used to say: All that is still lacking is that they put a reward on it!" — The Author.

[103]

the introduction of the so-called general confession, ministers have been deprived of the best, indeed often the only, opportunity to speak urgently to the hearts of those confessing to them, according to each one's particular condition. What have preachers become now? Shepherds of souls have turned into pulpit-orators. — The general confession has, to be sure, not been commanded but only permitted; yet it has been introduced in almost every place, for the convenience both of those confessing and of the preachers, but to the great harm of souls.

The third reason, finally, which Mr. H. names, is: "that under the church's present constitution (servitude), the clergyman not infrequently finds himself having to pronounce a blessing where God, in his Word, has pronounced curse and damnation." — On this point it is mentioned that a Saxon preacher is compelled, should such persons wish to enter a new marriage, to remarry even those who have been divorced contrary to God's Word; and likewise to give absolution, the Sacrament, and the blessing, without refusal, to those who according to God's Word are living in adultery (Matthew 5:32). "There is, moreover," Mr. H. writes further, "yet another case: namely, the marrying of the unchaste, who already have wives and children but abandon one after another — indeed abandon their own flesh and blood, their own children — in order to be married to a second, third, or fourth, for the sake of new lust or more money. Every objection against such marriages is declared invalid by law, and therefore every preacher is legally bound to marry such persons without refusal. Thus clergy today must let themselves be misused as tools of unchastity, and after the devil has accomplished all his works, they must pronounce the blessing over it. Even though we are able to preach the Word, we are nevertheless not permitted to act against the Word."

From the foregoing the reader can see in what shameful bonds the church and its ministers in Saxony lie. That Mr. Höpfner reports nothing but undeniable truth we can confirm from our own experience. Indeed, we must confess that much that is important is still being passed over in silence here — things to which a Saxon preacher is bound, and which he cannot do without denying God's Word. Among these belongs the fact that a Saxon preacher must use a liturgy (Agende) and hymnbooks that contain the most manifest unbelief, and indeed that he must recognize the most abominable heretics, scoffers, blasphemers, and the most avowed enemies of Christ and his church as his ecclesiastical superiors.

However dreadful, then, the state of the church in Saxony and in most of the German states appears according to this account, we must nevertheless decidedly reject the step which Mr. H. has taken, although we ourselves took this very step out of an erring conscience some eight years ago. For it is indeed certain to us that a Lutheran preacher cannot accept an office in Saxony, since, upon accepting such a position, conditions are laid before him which he cannot agree to without violating his conscience; but if a preacher has, perhaps in ignorance, accepted a Saxon pastoral office, and later comes to the realization that he has thereby taken upon himself obligations conflicting with God's Word, then he must indeed protest against and refrain from doing what is sinful that has been laid upon him to do, but he may never voluntarily abandon an office once entrusted to him. Mr. Höpfner does say: "I am leaving for the sake of conscience — that is, because I wish to be a good shepherd." This, however, is a contradiction. Christ requires of a good shepherd that he not abandon the sheep entrusted to him, and not flee (John 10:12); now it surely cannot be against conscience to keep Christ's commandment, and still less can one, for conscience's sake, transgress a commandment of Christ. There can be only two cases in which a preacher may lawfully leave his congregation: either when he is called away by God, or when he is persecuted and driven out (Matthew 10:23). In the latter case a preacher does so because he is forbidden in God's Word to drive out force with force.

May God enlighten our dear brothers in office and in the faith, that they may testify with word and deed for the truth and against all that is false, but never voluntarily abandon their flocks — rather let them give up their lives instead. If they remain faithful, there is no doubt that God will, sooner or later, rescue them from their Babylonian captivity.

To the Readers of the "Lutheraner." — Our paper concludes its second volume with the present issue; since, beginning with the next volume, it will appear in an enlarged format without any increase in price, and since it will, due to certain circumstances, be necessary to send out the first two issues together at once, readers are asked to be patient should the next issues be somewhat longer in coming than usual.

Paid. 2nd Volume. Mr. P. Wier.

Printed by Weber and Olshausen.