# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1849_S98
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 98 —

immediate call to the preaching office has occurred, and will not occur
again down to the end.

On the second main point. The Missourians: "We would not want to
say that God wishes to deal with us through the public church office as
such, but through the Word; the office, however, is the order he has
instituted for the proclamation of his Word, which can also be effective
outside the public office, so that we know from Scripture and experience
how, in cases of need, in order to deal with people through his Word, he
is willing to make use of persons who do not hold the public office as
well. Thus the words of institution in the administration of the holy
sacraments are likewise not effective on account of the office to which
the Lord commits himself, but the Word is effective in itself (Heb. 4).
Least of all can preachers bring it about, through their office, that
bread and wine in the Lord's Supper are truly blessed and the body and
blood of Christ imparted in them; it is expressly the doctrine of our
church, according to God's Word, that our faith and the sacrament do not
depend on the person — whether he be merely pious or wicked, but also
whether ordained or unordained, rightly called or having crept in
[uncalled]. Luther teaches: 'Even if the devil himself came,' etc. Luther
says further: 'Our faith and the sacrament must not depend on the
person, whether he be pious or wicked, ordained or unordained, called or
having crept in,' etc. At the same time, however, this same Luther does
not approve of a head of household administering the Holy Supper at
sick- and deathbeds."

Against the third part of the pastoral letter, the Missourians claim for
a Christian congregation the right of independence, as Luther develops it
at length, notably in his letter to the Bohemians. They add: "It cannot,
indeed, be denied — — — subjects itself to church orders." pp. 31–32.
Concerning the pastoral letter's closing remarks, the Missourians write
the following: "As for their content itself," etc. pp. 33–35.

Division of the Synod.

At last year's Synod convention, a motion had already been made to
divide the Synod into two district synods; the Synod, however, declined
to take up this motion, because such a division seemed to it still
premature. Since the matter was raised anew at this year's Synod
convention, the Synod resolved to give the subject closer consideration.

In favor of dividing the Synod, the difficulty was especially and
chiefly pointed out that attendance at the annual Synod convention, given
the great distances involved, posed for many members, in that ministers
and congregations of limited means could not afford the necessary travel
costs.

Against this, on the other hand, it was pointed out that one of the
chief purposes of our Synod's fellowship is "that the various gifts
should show themselves for the common good," as well as the danger that,
with a hasty division of the Synod, differing and mutually opposed
tendencies could very easily arise and become entrenched.

After an exchange of the various views and an examination of the
relevant reasons, the Synod finally concluded that such a division ought
not yet take place, and charged Pastor Crämer with setting out the
reasons for and against in writing. This document was indeed later
presented and adopted as the Synod's own statement.