# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1847 11 16_S46
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

took his own life. This happened in the year 1527. The most dreadful of all examples of this kind, however, is that of an Italian jurist named Francesco Spiera, who had likewise recognized the truth of the evangelical-Lutheran doctrine, but who later twice denied it against the testimony of his own conscience, and indeed, the last time, in his native city of Cittadella, solemnly recanted it in order to save his life. From that moment on he carried hell in his heart, until at last, after unheard-of anguish of conscience and torment of soul, he wretchedly gave up his spirit in the year 1548 amid groaning and lamentation. —

To what end has God done this? For this reason: to warn all Lutherans, to whom God has given the jewel of pure doctrine, against falling away. O let us not trifle with our salvation! Be not deceived, cries the holy apostle, God is not mocked! Let us listen to his voice, which calls out to us in warning, as with the sound of thunder, in words and in fearful judgments: "Hold fast what you have, that no one take your crown!" Let us consider: even if (as has already been said) those who remain steadfast in the truth must wear the crown of thorns of contempt, mockery, and hatred, what of it? Thereby they become like Him who had to bleed on the cross for confessing that He himself was the Truth. But as he now sits upon the throne of his glory, so will he also one day bring his faithful confessors from disgrace to eternal honor, from strife to eternal triumph. He will also confess them before his Father and crown their heads with the unfading victor's wreath of heavenly glory. For he says: "He who endures to the end will be saved. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life." Amen! Amen!

Luther's Answer to the Question: Whether a layman may or should, in certain cases, administer the Holy Supper secretly to himself and his household in his own house?

(A letter to Wolfgang Brauer, pastor at Jessen. Opp. Hal. X, 2736.)

Grace and peace in Christ. Worthy, dear Pastor, in answer to the question which your good friend at Linz, Sigmund Hangreuter, has laid before you in writing and desired to have brought to me, this is my answer: that you should inform the good gentleman and friend that he is not obliged to undertake such a practice, of administering communion to himself and his household, and that it is also unnecessary for him to do so, since he has not been called to it nor has any command for it, and that, apart from this, even where the tyrannical churchmen — whose duty it well is to do so — will not administer it to him or his household, he can nevertheless be saved by faith through the Word; moreover, it would give great offense to administer the Sacrament here and there in private houses in this manner, and in the long run it would come to no good end, but would only give rise to sheer division and sects — as indeed people nowadays are strange and the devil is raging. For the first Christians, in the Acts of the Apostles, did not use the Sacrament in this particular way in private houses, but came together; and even if they had done so, such an example is no longer tolerable now, just as it is not tolerable now that we should hold all goods in common, as they did at that time, for the Gospel is now openly spread abroad together with the Sacraments. But that a father of a household teaches the Word of God to his own people is right and ought to be so, for God has commanded that we should teach and raise our children and household, and the Word is entrusted to every man; but the Sacrament is a public confession and ought to have public ministers, since it is written there, as Christ says, that it is to be done in remembrance of him — that is, as St. Paul says, to proclaim or preach the Lord's death until he comes; and there it also says that they should come together, and it sternly rebukes those who each individually and separately make use of the Lord's Supper for themselves; whereas it is not forbidden, but rather commanded, that each one in particular teach his own household with God's Word, and himself as well — yet no one is to baptize himself, etc., etc. For it is quite a different thing to hold a public office in the church than to be a father of a household over his servants, and therefore they are not to be mingled or confused with one another. Since, then, there is here neither necessity nor calling, one ought not, without God's certain command, undertake anything here out of mere devotion, for no good will come of it. This you may, my dear Pastor, give as an answer on my behalf. Herewith commended to God. Amen. On St. David's Day, Anno 1536. Mart. Lutherus.

The General Synod and History.

In one of the recent numbers of the "Lutheran Standard" (of October 27) a correspondent states that the fact that the so-called Lutheran General Synod has fallen away from the Lutheran church can no longer be denied or glossed over at present. The hope of keeping people in the dark about this has now become a broken reed, which pierces the hand of those who wish to lean upon it. The correspondent, referring to the newest edition of Dr. Guericke's church history (6th edition, part 3, page 366, note 2), concludes: "History has already recorded for posterity that the General Synod is not an evangelical-Lutheran body, inasmuch as it does not hold fast precisely to those doctrines by which the evangelical-Lutheran church is distinguished from other denominations. History declares that the General Synod has expressly and without any concealment renounced the distinctive doctrines of Lutheranism, and at the same time has declared itself in favor of a (false) union and Methodist practice. —

May God grant that those preachers and congregations who, out of ignorance, have let themselves be lured into the new sect which the General Synod has founded while retaining the Lutheran name, may now at last open their eyes, hastily leave that apostate fellowship, and return to their mother church. It is not only beyond doubt that so wretched a man-made, baseless contrivance as the General Synod is must sooner or later fall apart of itself; it is also certain that, since not even natural honesty exists alongside its false faith, this will terribly avenge itself; the darkness will grow ever more dreadful, because "they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: that they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness." 2 Thess. 2:10–14.

The Western District Synod of the Ev. Luth. Church of Ohio, at a session held on the 31st of May of this year, resolved:

"That every synod which calls itself Evangelical Lutheran should make it its duty to preserve among its members the pure doctrines and usages of our church, as they are recognized and set forth by us in her confessional writings as agreeing with the divine Holy Scripture; but that the obligation of ministers to be ordained to subscribe to these writings is a matter that belongs for deliberation to the next General Synod, where it will in any case, according to a resolution already adopted, be taken up for deliberation and decision."

Furthermore, the same body, at one of its subsequent sessions, adopted the following important resolutions:

"Resolved, that this synod considers it highly desirable that every member of our body earnestly strive, in the administration of his office, to promote as far as possible uniformity in the rite and practice of the church.

Resolved, that this body, since it considers the English catechism published by Mr. Ludwig in New York to be the best edition of this work, recommends it above all others, but at the same time requests Mr. Ludwig, in any future edition, to insert the omitted word "true" (i.e., true body) in the answer to the first question in the fifth chief part, and to omit the word "merely" in the explanation of the third article in the second chief part; and in general to follow the genuine Lutheran catechism as closely as possible."

Surely every Lutheran Christian will especially rejoice heartily over this new and forthcoming public and official confession, by a larger body, to the symbolical books of our precious church.*) We think, indeed, that

*) We cannot forbear to remind our readers once again that Mr. Ludwig in New York is presently preparing a new edition of the public ecclesiastical confessions of the evangelical-Lutheran church, called the Book of Concord,