# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1850 01 08_S152
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

...Roman church teaches, whether it is written or not. What a confusion of concepts, what ignorance — or else what great malice! Since Mr. Theophilus is a member of the united church, we will assume, to his credit, that he simply does not know the difference between tradition and the symbols (confessions); but then, if he himself truly wishes to be as humble a Christian as he praises Mr. Weyl for being, he ought not to have entered into a dispute over matters unknown to him, nor been so boastful. And how could he so recklessly slander the Formula of Concord, whose very first page, it follows, he has not even read? For there, right at the outset, it reads word for word as follows:

"We believe, teach, and confess that the sole rule and standard, according to which all doctrines and teachers alike are to be judged and evaluated, are the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testament alone, as it is written: 'Thy Word is a lamp unto my feet and a light unto my path,' Ps. 119:105; and St. Paul: 'Though an angel from heaven should come and preach otherwise, let him be accursed,' Gal. 1:8. — But other writings of the ancient and modern teachers, whatever name they bear, are not to be held equal to Holy Scripture, but all of them together are to be subordinated to it, and are to be received in no other or further way than as witnesses, showing in what manner, and in what places, after the time of the Apostles, this doctrine of the Prophets and Apostles was preserved. — And since, immediately after the time of the Apostles, indeed already in their own lifetime, false teachers and heretics broke in, and since, against them, symbols — that is, brief, well-rounded confessions — were drawn up in the early church, which were held to be the unanimous, universal Christian faith and the confession of the orthodox and true church, namely the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, and that of Athanasius, so we confess ourselves to the same and hereby reject all heresies and doctrines that have been introduced into the church of God contrary to them. — But as far as concerns the divisions in matters of faith that have arisen in our own times, we hold as the unanimous consensus and declaration of our Christian faith and confession, especially against the papacy and its false worship, idolatry, superstition, and other sects, as our symbol for this present time: the first, unaltered Augsburg Confession, which was presented to Emperor Charles the Fifth at Augsburg in the year 1530 at the great Diet of the Empire, together with its Apology and the Articles drawn up at Schmalkalden in the year 1537 and signed at that time by the foremost theologians. And because such matters also concern the common laity and the salvation of their souls, we also confess ourselves to the Large and Small Catechisms of Dr. Luther, as these two catechisms stand set forth in Luther's works, as the layman's Bible, in which everything is comprehended that is treated at length in Holy Scripture and that a Christian needs to know for his salvation. According to this guide, as stated above, all doctrines are to be set in order, and whatever is contrary to it, as opposed to the unanimous declaration of our faith, is to be rejected and condemned. — In this way the distinction between the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and all other writings is maintained, and Holy Scripture alone remains the sole judge, rule, and standard, according to which, as the sole touchstone, all doctrines are and must be recognized and judged, whether they be good or evil, right or wrong. — The other symbols, however, and the writings cited, are not judges, as Holy Scripture is, but only witnesses and declarations of the faith, showing how, at any given time, Holy Scripture was understood and expounded in the church of God, in disputed articles, by those then living, and how doctrine contrary to it was rejected and condemned."

Ah, if only Mr. Theophilus had first read and understood this, he could have spared himself his bold challenge; he would then know what the symbols are, and could at most still dispute whether Holy Scripture is indeed rightly understood and grasped in the Lutheran symbols. And if he would then conscientiously lay the sole rule and standard — the written Word of God — alongside our confession, and ask the Holy Spirit for enlightenment, he could yet come to a recognition of his unionistic errors, and would still learn to understand why we bind ourselves to our symbols — namely, because they agree with the one written Word of God — and why we testify against the false doctrine of the Unionists and the Reformed — namely, because it does not agree with Holy Scripture and is therefore false. Thus he would also have to recognize that with his first conclusion against us he has revealed only his own ignorance, but has by no means put us simple Lutherans into any embarrassment. No, Mr. Theophilus, the reason we condemn the Unionist and Reformed error does not lie in some inconsistent mania for condemning, but because it is written in Scripture: "This is my body" — so that the Reformed contradict the plain Scripture, while the Unionists are worse still, and keep entirely silent about it and ask, with Pilate, "What is truth?" — After this, the second conclusion also collapses into nothing. For Mr. Theophilus had, in a certain hope of victory, already trumpeted beforehand what he intended to answer us if, out of fear of being taken for Roman Catholics, we should acknowledge Holy Scripture as the sole rule and standard of doctrine. He calls out to us: let us then reach the hand of peace to all (understand: Unionists, Reformed, etc.) who honestly accept this standard, no longer serve unbelief as mockery and nourishment, and refuse to no church that does this the name of a Christian church. Oh, Theophilus, if only you had kept silent! We have strife with the Unionists and Reformed only because they do not honestly accept Holy Scripture as the standard of faith and doctrine, and it is they who have stirred up this strife and who keep it alive. — As for whatever else appears in Mr. Theophilus's open letter, namely his gross sin against the Eighth Commandment, in that he scatters wicked, ambiguous, and slanderous rumors about us into the world, and only afterward asks us whether they are even true — this we will charge to his unionistic blindness and to his misguided love for his union-brethren, and will ask God for him for forgiveness and enlightenment. — Finally, we ask him not again to call our upright "Lutheraner" of St. Louis a half-brother of the Weyl Church Messenger. The simple, orthodox Lutheran Church knows nothing of such half-brotherhoods. That Mr. Weyl, however, is not Lutheran, he again clearly proves by letting himself be praised for regarding the distinguishing doctrines between the Lutherans on the one hand and the Reformed and Unionists on the other as secondary matters — whereas already in Luther's Small Catechism, as is well known, the Holy Supper is treated in the sixth chief part, and that on the ground of Scripture, since the Sacrament of the Altar is a blessed means of grace, and therefore an error that undermines the scriptural doctrine of the Holy Supper must be recognized by every simple, believing Christian as dangerous to the soul. — August Crämer.

(Submitted.)
A Dialogue on California.

A. "Whatever does not come from faith is sin." (Rom. 14:23.) Do you believe that?

B. Yes, of course. What Christian would deny that?

A. Is that your full and serious conviction?

B. Why do you doubt it?

A. Because you intend to go to California.

B. Well, can one not go there in faith as well?

A. Then let me hear in what faith you intend to go.

B. Why, I rely on no one else but God. Do you think I don't know that everything depends on His blessing? I cannot vouch for it that I will remain alive, that I will have good fortune, that I will be able to come back again, that I will find my family healthy and well again — but God can. That I believe; on that I venture it; and that is my faith. What do you have to object to that?

A. Do you then think that one may take comfort in God's protection and help in one case just as in another?

B. In which case would one not?

A. For example, when one undertakes something that springs from an impure source.

B. I do hope you don't mean to impute impure motives to my well-considered plan. That very many, many go there in no Christian frame of mind at all, I grant you without contradiction — but of your own friend you ought to think a little better.

A. What, then, is driving you?

B. To put it briefly, nothing but poverty. You know that I am neither wasteful nor lazy; and yet I cannot get free from making debts and paying off debts. I do not lightly ask anyone for help, but neither do I wish to break my word. But I have gotten into such straits over this that scarcely anyone will believe me. And if only it had gradually gotten a little better! No — it has only gotten worse and worse. Three years ago the misfortune began, and it has not let up since. First I had lent my hard-saved money to an unfaithful friend; then came my wife's long illness; then I burned down; then came the wet summer that cost me my whole harvest; then the cattle plague —

A. Enough, enough. I know that you have been dealt with especially hard. But is the journey to California, then, the way by which you are to be helped?