# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_Februar 1864_S58
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

58 Excerpts as Contributions to Pastoral Casuistry.

...the greatest theologian, and could write with angels' pens, may not remain the editor of church papers in which many thousand readers believe they find truth, instruction, and edification.” So many words, so many slanderous, base, disgraceful, contemptible untruths. And with such childish fits of rage does the old, vain, angry man wish to set the Missouri Synod on Prof. Walther! How little the Herr Doctor and Professor Seyffarth knows himself and his own importance, and how little he knows the Missouri Synod! How blind vanity and anger make one! How deep a man can fall!

A member of the Missouri Synod.

Excerpts as Contributions to Pastoral Casuistry.

On the inquiry:

Whether a parishioner who was accused of adultery, but who denied having committed this sin, is to be suspended from the Holy Supper?

the theological faculty at Leipzig answered, under date of July 12, 1603, as follows:

God's grace together with our prayer and ever-diligent services beforehand! Reverend and learned, especially favored sirs and friends! Your letter, dated the 9th of June of this year 1603, we have duly received, read out collegially, and gathered from it in what manner Quirin N., a married man and a parishioner of yours, was accused by Maria N., an unmarried woman, of having gotten her with child, but he denied the fact and brought a countersuit for defamation against the plaintiff, whereby the matter (particularly because, upon a further citation being issued, the plaintiff did not appear) fell into litispendency (a stay of process). Since, however, the said N., in order to vindicate his innocence, applied to you on various occasions for absolution and communion, this was refused him for weighty reasons, in consideration that the sanctuary is not to be cast before dogs, and that the sacraments were not instituted for the purpose that one might, by their use, rid oneself of this or that imputation; moreover, that the said N., although he has not yet been legally convicted of adultery, is nevertheless held by you in ill repute on account of improper, suspicious conversation with the woman, and also on account of various frivolous remarks that have been heard from him. Wherefore you have, up to now, had good and proper reason to hesitate in admitting him to communion, so as to avoid, as far as possible, the profanation of the Holy Supper, offense to the church, and confusion of conscience that would result should he, in confession, state something other than what he otherwise admits;