# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1904_S46
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

46 Proceedings of the twentieth convention

makes. Here regard for the congregation demands that it not be offended but instructed, that he who is supposed to be its shepherd, watchman and servant of Christ must never agree to its counsel and dealings. So-called consideration — here equivalent to giving way — for the sake of the congregation's perverse position, for the sake of individual members, for the sake of the former pastor and the like, is reprehensible consideration, which can only end in harm for pastor and congregation. But if one goes the way God wills, it must in the end prove true, even if perhaps through much cross and hardship: "He doeth all things gloriously" [literally: "He leads everything gloriously out"].

We said earlier that membership in the lodge separates from the orthodox Lutheran Church just as well — indeed, we must say, far more, namely on account of its rationalistic character — as membership in the Catholic, Methodist or any other sectarian church. In saying this we do not want to pronounce the judgment that it is not possible for an individual lodge brother under certain circumstances still to be a Christian and to have remained a child of God. This may be the case especially where such a lodge man says: "I simply cannot see that it is a sin to belong to the lodge!" This is a very common remark which preachers often get to hear in their dealings with lodge people: "I cannot see that!" And then it is often added: "If it were clear to me that it is a sin to belong to the lodge, I would certainly separate from the lodge; I would not want to belong to it an hour longer. But I can say with a good conscience: I see nothing bad in the lodge and therefore see no reason why I should have to leave the lodge. But I am ready to be instructed, and will leave the lodge as soon as I am convinced of the sinfulness of its nature."

Much is said in this tone. Supposing now that it is really an "inability to see" and not an unwillingness hidden and concealed behind an inability, would not a refusal of the Sacrament still have to be omitted in the end, despite all other misgivings? In such cases we must not forget that 1 Cor. 11:28, 29 is written: "But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself." On the basis of this word one must say that the fact that someone is really a Christian does not yet mean that he is entitled to a share in the Holy Supper. We set this out in the first part: that it is necessary that a Christian be capable of a certain self-examination. He must be able to examine himself as to whether he is in a state such as God requires of a communicant. A communicant must possess a certain maturity, or, as Luther says: "A fitness is required for it." That does not mean that he would have to have reached a definite degree of piety; for if one wanted to wait,