# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1845 03 08_S55
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

against the Lutherans, for these have nothing to do with the new betrayers of pure truth, let them call themselves whatever they please: Lutherans, Protestants, and so forth.

Finally, whenever Mr. O. quotes Luther, he usually quotes from Luther's so-called Table Talk, indeed he even calls what is contained therein the true "quintessence" of the Gospel or of Luther's teaching. If Mr. O. says this according to his conscience, then he thereby gives proof before all the world that he has never known Luther's doctrine, and has therefore perhaps, out of ignorance, left the fellowship of those who confess Luther's teaching. We believe, however, that he speaks so against his own conscience, since we know that he has read, if not much, still various other things from Luther's genuine writings. However that may be, we hereby let him know that we do not by any means deny having found many grains of gold of evangelical truth in the Table Talk, but that we regard precisely this part of Luther's works as the one from which, of all of them, Luther's doctrine and opinion can least of all be drawn, since this book only appeared after Luther's death, was in part gathered together without due distinction between the true and the false, the genuine and the spurious, and was of course never acknowledged or approved by Luther himself as his own product. Let Mr. O., therefore, not be surprised if we do not stand behind everything he picks out of it.

We by no means deny that there have been Lutherans, and perhaps still are, who, out of excessive veneration for the person of Luther, want to defend everything in the Table Talk itself as untouchable simply because it bears his name; but we have already stated in this paper: although we recognize Luther as the chosen and sanctified instrument of God through whom the old apostolic doctrine and church were restored in their original form, we have nothing to do with the deification of Luther, and we test his words by God's Word as well, and therefore naturally accept the Table Talk least of all unconditionally — especially since much in it, as noted, evidently does not stem from Luther at all, or at least not in the form in which it has been handed down to us there.

We are, moreover, not the first Lutherans to judge in this way; we here follow the orthodox and most enlightened theologians of our church. In the first place, Luther himself says: "In the books of St. Augustine one finds many sayings which flesh and blood have spoken; and I too must confess of myself that I speak many words which are not God's words, when I speak outside the preaching office, at home at table, or elsewhere." [See House Postil, Sunday Jubilate.]

[Footnote: The papists likewise assert this whenever they find it convenient for their own defense. The Franciscan Johannes of Deventer, answering for the saying of Pope Pius II held against him — "that for important reasons the priests were deprived of marriage, but for even more important reasons it was given back to them" — responds with these words: "We do not rate the words of Pius so highly, for great and clever men sometimes speak somewhat carelessly, words which one would rather have seen buried." (Harm. A. C.)]

55

Johann Gerhard writes: "The book of the Table Talk was neither seen, nor read, nor approved by Luther; indeed it was in many places altered, mutilated, and enlarged according to the private judgment of certain persons, which certainly takes from it the credibility of a genuine book." [Exeges. de S. S. § 133.] Hutter writes the same, adding: "The Table Talk was gathered together only after Luther's death, rather confusedly, without proper judgment and without care, by various persons who probably did not always grasp Luther's meaning well enough. Therefore no weight is to be placed on this book in deciding questions, or in doubtful and disputed cases, unless Luther defends the same opinion in his other writings." [Loc. th. pag. 634.] Scherzerus writes: "Luther himself neither saw nor approved the Table Talk; that therefore nothing from this book can be set against us was recognized even by Pistorius himself, after he had become the most bitter enemy of Luther and a raging papist." [Breviar. th. pag. 576.] Dannhauer, Möller, Mayer, Buddeus, and others judge likewise. Moreover, even the Reformed are fair enough that they do not wish to attribute what is questionable in the Table Talk to Luther; thus the Reformed theologian Voetius writes: "The argument of the papist Serrarius drawn from Luther's Table Talk is worthless, because it is not a book of Luther's and was never seen by him." (Sel. disp. th. I, 997.)

The kind reader will forgive us for having been more detailed on the subject touched upon than may seem necessary or profitable. But one should consider that it is usually the Table Talk from which the papists draw their sharpest arrows against Lutheranism; the foregoing clarification therefore seemed to us urgently necessary, especially for the sake of those who perhaps get to read little or nothing of Luther's incomparable writings except the excerpts that the papists make from that book.

Finally we note: if Mr. O. wishes to continue sucking poison out of the Table Talk or elsewhere, as a spider sucks poison even out of flowers — that is, to pick out a stray blemish here and there and then say to his poor readers, "Behold, this is Luther's true likeness in doctrine and life!" — then let him do so upon his own conscience. We, on the other hand, intend to continue gathering, like bees, precious honey out of Luther's glorious, spirit-filled writings — that is, to share Lutheran testimonies of the truth unto godliness with our readers, for the awakening and strengthening of their hearts. We wish to point our readers to the true, sweet kernel of Lutheran doctrine; this, we think, will be the best refutation of all of Mr. Oertel's attacks upon our dear Luther, and will expose Mr. O. — as one who strains at a gnat against Lutheranism while swallowing a camel in Papism (Matthew 23:23–24) — to the deserved contempt of all instructed and honest readers.

We also thank you very much, by the way, for the proposal repeatedly made, not without clarity, that we join forces with Mr. Oertel and his associates in the fight against those whom we too regard as heterodox among the Protestants; we want absolutely nothing to do with Mr. Oertel's vulgar, spiritless, heartless, loveless, and unconscionable abuse of Methodists, New Lutherans, etc. We still know very well how to distinguish between those who, without knowing it, are led astray by their own hearts, and those who (God knows for what reasons) knowingly and willfully seek to keep and confirm the poor people in superstition, idolatry, and the denial of the sole valid merit of Jesus Christ, the one mediator between God and man.

A Worldly Mind.

Once, when the old, praiseworthy Elector of Saxony, to whom the law of God was dearer than many thousand pieces of gold and silver (Psalm 119:72), wished to speak with a nobleman who was wholly given over to usury and money-making about God's Word and matters of religion, such a conversation was so distasteful to the young lord that he laid his opinion quite openly before the elector. He said, namely: "Most gracious lord, such matters are none of your grace's concern; your electoral grace has more important matters to trouble yourself with and more pressing things to attend to." Luther heard of this rebuke given to the godly elector by a child of the world — who, to be sure, always has more important things to do than to trouble himself about God's Word and the salvation of his soul — and immediately asked: "Was there also bran there?" Then he told the following fable. The lion, as king, invited all the animals to a feast. When he had prepared for them a sumptuous meal, treated them kindly, and had it served splendidly, the sow comes along and asks: "Is there also bran there?" From this fable the blessed Luther then made the following apt application: "So it is also with our Epicureans. We set before them in the Christian church, through God's Word, and serve up to them precious dishes or foods of God's grace, forgiveness of sins, and eternal life and blessedness; then our Epicureans turn up their snouts and paw about after Joachimsthalers and gold guilders, saying: 'Is there also bran there?' What more need be said? Husks belong in a trough for a sow, and what use has a sow for nutmeg?"

B.

A Confident Answer.

When the emperor Julian — who had become apostate from Christianity and was most hostile to it — found himself in the midst of his brilliant career of victories, and many Christians, with great anxiety, looked ahead with dread to the further undertakings of this powerful man against the Christians, then