American Lutheranism Volume II Part 8

The members of the Georgia Synod are for the greater part descendants of the Salzburgers, who, in 1734, founded Ebenezer, twenty-five miles from Savannah. 6. The Mississippi Synod, organized in 1860. 7. The Tennessee Synod, founded 1820. 8. The Holston Synod, which branched off from the Tennessee Synod in 1860.--These synods are almost entirely English. Very few of its congregations have regular German services beside the English. The synodical Publis.h.i.+ng House and Theological Seminary are located in Columbia, S.C. Other schools are: Newberry College in Newberry, S.C.; Roanoke College in Salem, Va.; Lenoir College in Hickory, N.C. The official paper of the United Synod, the _Lutheran Church Visitor_, has appeared for fourteen years with the motto, "G.o.d's Word, Our Rule; Christ, Our Pattern; A Pure Faith, Our Watchword." Dr.

W.H. Greever, editor of the _Visitor_ from 1904 to 1914, now edits the _American Lutheran Survey_. In addition to several benevolent inst.i.tutions, the Southern Synods support a heathen mission in j.a.pan since 1892. In 1886 the United Synod numbered 32,000 communicants, 14,000 belonging to the Tennessee and Holston Synods. The figures prior to the Merger in 1918 show 257 pastors, 484 congregations, 53,226 communicant, and 73,510 baptized members.

143. Origin of General Body South.--In 1863 the North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, and Southwest Virginia Synods withdrew from the General Synod because of the Civil War and offensive resolutions adopted by the General Synod with respect to Southern Lutherans and their att.i.tude toward the war. In the same year the four synods, uniting with the Georgia Synod, organized the "General Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the Confederate States of America." After the war (1866) this name was changed to "Evangelical Lutheran General Synod in North America," and subsequently to "General Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the South." In the interest of union, the Tennessee Synod, which occupied a truly Lutheran position and stood for an unqualified adoption of the Lutheran symbols, sent a delegate to the General Synod South in 1867. Seventeen years later, 1884, at Salisbury, N.C., a doctrinal basis was adopted, which in 1886 resulted in the organization of the United Synod in the South, now merged into the United Lutheran Church in America.

DOCTRINAL BASIS.

144. From Laxism to Confessionalism.--The secession of the four Southern synods in 1863 was not caused by any doctrinal differences or dissatisfaction with, and opposition to, the un-Lutheran confessional basis and unionistic practise of the General Synod. Nor was it of any immediate consequence as to the doctrinal and confessional att.i.tude of the General Synod South, organized in the same year. Moreover, at its first convention in 1863, the General Synod in the Confederate States, the liberal-minded Bachman presiding, after animated discussions, declared in favor of a qualified subscription to the Augsburg Confession. Unanimously and solemnly the following doctrinal basis was adopted: 1. That the Holy Scriptures are the sole infallible rule of faith and practise; 2. that the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Augustana "contain the fundamental doctrines of the Holy Scriptures"; 3. that, whereas different views concerning some doctrines of the Augustana have ever obtained and still obtain among the members, Synod permits "the full and free exercise of personal judgment with reference to these articles." (_Dist. Doctr._, 1893, 171.) Doctrines in question were those of the Lord's Supper, absolution, baptismal regeneration, Sunday, etc., as set forth by Schmucker and Kurtz.

However, already in the revised const.i.tution, printed in the _Book of Wors.h.i.+p_, 1864, the third, the most offensive point of this basis, was omitted. And soon after contact with the Tennessee Synod and the desire to draw her into the union of the general body, led to a movement in the confessional direction. In 1867 the General Synod South resolved to deny approval to publications supporting principles in conflict with the Augustana, and to refuse appointment of theological professors holding doctrines in conflict with this Confession. According to the _Book of Wors.h.i.+p_ of 1868 the candidates for ordination were required to take an oath of fidelity to the Word of G.o.d and the Lutheran Confessions based thereon. The Form of Confirmation contained a pledge of lifelong fidelity to the Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. In 1872 Synod adopted an essay of Dr. Dorsch, in which he declares that the General Synod South unequivocally confesses the Augsburg Confession in its true, real, and original sense. According to the Const.i.tution of the Theological Seminary (1873) the professors acknowledged, and subscribed to, "the Augsburg Confession, as in all its parts in harmony with the Rule of Faith and a correct exhibition of the doctrines of the Word of G.o.d." In 1880 the General Synod South informed the Tennessee and Holston Synods that she adopts the secondary Lutheran symbols "as in accord with, and an unfolding of, the teaching of the Unaltered Augsburg Confession." In 1882 the General Synod declared itself ready to enter into organic union with other Lutheran bodies "on an unequivocal Lutheran basis." Several years later, as stated, the union was effected.

145. Sound Lutheran Basis.--The confessional basis agreed upon 1884 and adopted at the organization in 1886 embraces the following articles: "1.

The Holy Scriptures, the inspired writings of the Old and New Testaments, the only standard of doctrine and church discipline. 2. As a true and faithful exhibition of the doctrines of the Holy Scriptures in regard to matters of faith and practise, the three ancient symbols, the Apostolic, the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creeds, and the Unaltered Augsburg Confession of Faith. Also the other Symbolical Books of the Ev.

Lutheran Church, _viz.:_ the Apology, the Smalcald Articles, the Smaller and Larger Catechisms of Luther, and the Formula of Concord, as true and Scriptural developments of the doctrines taught in the Augsburg Confession, and in the perfect harmony of one and the same faith."

Substantially this was the basis of the Tennessee Synod; its adoption at Salisbury must be regarded as a triumph of the confessional fidelity of this body. "The strength of the Tennessee Synod," says Dr. E.T. Horn, "was given to the maintenance of orthodoxy; nor are we able to deny that their champions.h.i.+p was needed and has been effectual." Among the other factors contributing to this result the testimony of Walther and the Missouri Synod must not be overlooked and underrated. Dr. A.G. Voigt, professor in the Seminary at Columbia, S.C., admits: "Lutherans in the South could not remain untouched by the influences that were at work in other parts of the country. The increasing appreciation of confessional Lutheranism which in the middle half of the nineteenth century pa.s.sed over from Germany into and through this country also gradually permeated the South. It served to deepen the devotion of the Tennessee Synod to the historic Lutheran Confessions, and to awaken in the other synods a growing esteem and affection for the same Confessions." (_Dist. Doctr._, 1914, 181.)

INDIFFERENTISM

146. Actual Conditions.--All sectarian churches formally acknowledge the Bible, yet they reject many of its doctrines. So a Lutheran synod may, in a formal and official way, accept the Lutheran symbols, and at the same time ignore or reject its material content. Witness the Lutheran state churches in Europe and the General Synod in America. In a measure, the actual conditions also within the congregations and district synods of the United Synod in the South have always been in conflict with their truly Lutheran basis. False doctrines, especially pertaining to the Puritanic observance of the Sabbath, were held and taught within the Synod. Without a word of criticism, for example, the _Lutheran Church Visitor_, July 13, 1911, published the following from the _Sunday-school Times_: "Don't use a public vehicle on Sunday unless you are prayerfully convinced that it would be sinning against G.o.d and man not to do so. Is not that a reasonable and safe principle? Is any other principle a safe one? A very limited amount of Sunday travel seems to be necessary.

Probably more than ninety-nine one-hundredths of it is unnecessary and therefore wrong. To use a trolley car or train to go to church on Sunday may or may not be right; it is simply a question of G.o.d's expressed will for the individual at that particular time. To walk, or to attend another church would sometimes be the solution. To make a mere convenience of Sunday travel, under any circ.u.mstances, would seem to be a violation of the spirit of the day. But G.o.d will make each case clear to each surrendered seeker after the light of G.o.d's will, if the doing of G.o.d's will and the avoiding of sin by the widest possible margin are the only impelling motives."

147. Ignoring Intersynodical Differences.--With respect to the doctrines controverted within the Lutheran Church of America the United Synod has always maintained a neutral and indifferentistic att.i.tude. Dr. Horn writes: "It can be said of the doctrinal basis of the Southern Synods that it is the sincere and intelligent confession of the churches. By this I do not mean that the Lutheran churches in the South have pondered all the controversies in which the symbols originated, and to which they gave the answer; nor that they have accepted all the inferences which sincere Lutherans now draw from the Confessions, and even may be justified in urging." (_Dist. Doctr._, 1893, 183.) Dr. Voigt: "The United Synod has no distinctive doctrines apart from the distinctive doctrines of common confessional Lutheranism." (_Dist. Doctr._, 1914, 179.) In other words, the United Synod accepts only those doctrines in which all agree who claim to be confessional Lutherans. The _Lutheran Church Visitor_, March 15, 1917, wrote: "The United Synod has the fundamental doctrines, rests on them, and is satisfied with them. Not, perhaps, the doctrines fundamental to Missouri, but fundamental to Christian faith and life." Ridiculing the doctrines of conversion and election as taught by the Missouri Synod, the _Visitor_ continues: "These doctrines are the simon-pure, unadulterated, unalloyed Lutheran doctrines! Missourianism and Lutheranism are convertible terms!"-- Regarding the fact that the United Synod has refused to take a definite stand with respect to the doctrinal differences within the Lutheran Church, the _Visitor_, March 15, 1917, remarked: "Still, husband and wife may live together in peace and happiness although they do not agree on every point. It may even be understood that some subjects are altogether taboo." This, evidently, is the spirit of indifferentism, inherited from the General Synod, with whom, in accordance with the law of spiritual affinity, the United Synod exchanged fraternal delegates, and is now organically united in the United Lutheran Church in America.

148. Old Spirit of Indifferentism.--To what extent the leaven of indifferentism was active also within the United Synod in the South appears from the following utterances of a layman in the _Lutheran Church Visitor_: "The spirit that developed this country, and that which has animated the clergy of the Lutheran Church, are antipodal. This unprogressive spirit, together with their aversion to innovations of all kinds, their refusal to deal with present-day problems, their mania for ramming doctrine wholesale down the throats of their communicants, their spirit of aloofness from ministers of other denominations, and their refusal to cooperate with them, has been the chief cause of this lack of progress in our Church. They have, in their strict and even painful adherence to dogma and form, taken the spirit and life out of the Church and its wors.h.i.+p. The enthusiasm and warmth of natural religion have given way to a religion of form and ceremony. They have taken the life and beauty out of the Bible, and made it a code of dry and inspired theology. Instead of preaching, they have almost invariably talked theology, and theology alone. Our Church has never been in need of would-be theologians, but we have been and are now sorely in need of pastors and preachers. They have discouraged honest investigation, if that investigation has the least taint of rationalism. In their supreme disgust for innovations they have made our Church as inflexible and unfit for the various conditions of modern life as the customs and practises of the Middle Ages would be out of place now. They have been completely oblivious of the fact that there are necessarily change and progress in theology and religion as well as in everything else. True, there are certain fundamentals that never grow old; equally true is it that there are some non-essentials that change with the varying hours.

The non-essential has been made essential, and so strongly insisted upon that it is almost a sacrilege even to insinuate against its authority."

The _Visitor_, March 15, 1917, referring to this publication, remarks: "Well, we admit the excerpt from the article is pretty raw. But the _Visitor_ believes in allowing some freedom even to the religious press.... Unanimity ere long becomes monotony. _Varietas sine unitate diversitas. Unitas sine varietate mors_."

UNLUTHERAN PRACTISE.

149. Lodge-, Pulpit-, and Altar-Fellows.h.i.+p.--Forbearance with all manner of weakness in doctrine and practise does not _per se_ conflict with confessional Lutheranism. But a refusal on principle to take the correct position, also as to Lutheran practise, is indeed incompatible with true Lutheranism. The att.i.tude of the United Synod, however, toward lodge-, pulpit-, altar-, and church-fellows.h.i.+p has always been of a kind which practically amounted to a denial of its confessional basis. Dr. Voigt confesses: "As a matter of fact and actual practise, Lutheran ministers in the United Synod do not invite others to occupy their pulpits indiscriminately; and although in some churches the custom of extending a general invitation at Communion still continues from earlier times, the practise is diminis.h.i.+ng, and in most churches has pa.s.sed away with the introduction of the Common Service. As to secret societies, there is not much agitation against them except in the Tennessee Synod, and a number of United Synod ministers are known to be members of such orders; but the sentiment of most ministers is unfavorable to them." (_Dist.

Doctr._, 1914, 188.) "Discussions in regard to stricter or more lax practises have never led to divisions nor issued in official p.r.o.nouncements of distinctive developments of confessional position."

"Firm as they are in their convictions, Southern Lutherans are generally adverse to controversy. This is probably the true explanation of the conservative att.i.tude of the United Synod towards the questions connected with pulpit- and altar-fellows.h.i.+p and secret societies. There are differences of view on these questions existing in the United Synod.

But the disposition has always been not to fight the differences out, but to wait for time to bring about unanimity in regard to them. In the formation of the United Synod peculiar circ.u.mstances thrust these questions upon the notice of the body; but it declined to legislate in regard to them because it was unwilling to go through the throes of controversy which a decision upon them involved. Combined with this aversion to controversy, there exists an evangelical [?] impatience of legal constraint, which impels men to act upon principle rather than by rule." "It has already been stated that the Tennessee Synod is unique among the synods const.i.tuting the United Synod in having rules against pulpit- and altar-fellows.h.i.+p and secret societies; and the United Synod has pledged itself not to employ in its general work, in its theological seminary, in its mission operations, in the editing of its official organ, any person who would foster secretism or unionistic fellows.h.i.+p."

(_Dist. Doctr._, 1914, 147 f.; 1893, 182.)

150. Att.i.tude toward Non-Lutheran Denominations.--The United Synod as such did not establish an exchange of delegates with any of the non-Lutheran churches. However, invitations to preach in their pulpits on the occasion of synodical conventions were not refused. The _Lutheran Church Visitor_, March 15, 1917: "Our United Synod ministers are not ashamed to speak of our Evangelical Lutheran testimony before Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, _et al., et id genus omne._" But the fact is that at such occasions the distinctive features of Lutheranism are, as a rule, pa.s.sed over in silence; that full fellows.h.i.+p of prayer and service is indulged in; and that the spirit of indifferentism as well as the desire, on the part of the Lutheran synods and congregations, for returning the comity and kindness received at the hands of Methodists, etc., is encouraged and strengthened. As such, furthermore, the United Synod did not take an active part in interdenominational organizations, but, on the other hand, did not consider it a denial of the truth when its pastors openly and heartily partic.i.p.ated in local ministerial unions, or when its congregations occasionally joined in union religious meetings. Thus Drs. Horn and Drach took part in the Interdenominational Conference at Edinburgh in 1910. The _Lutheran Church Visitor_ encouraged partic.i.p.ation in interdenominational meetings; _e.g._, in its issue of April 6, 1916, the Men's National Missionary Congress in Was.h.i.+ngton, D.C. "So it has done, does, and shall continue to do, and not be ashamed," declared the _Visitor_, March 15, 1917, and explained in defense of this att.i.tude toward non-Lutheran bodies: "The United Synod believes that the lump [non-Lutheran churches] cannot receive 'absent treatment,' and that the Lutheran leaven cannot be placed in the lump from a prohibitive distance." However, according to the history of the Lutheran Church in America, in practically all of the interdenominational movements and meetings partic.i.p.ated in by Lutherans, the rule has been not to confess, but, directly or indirectly, to deny the distinctive truths of Lutheranism. Speaking of the United Synod, Dr. Voigt remarked: "Rigid exclusiveness is quite foreign to its spirit."

TENNESSEE AND HOLSTON SYNODS.

151. Tennessee Lowering Her Standard.--The Tennessee Synod, whose early history is dealt with extensively in _American Lutheranism, Part I_, was the main factor in bringing about the change in the confessional att.i.tude of the Southern synods. The _Lutheran Church Visitor_, March 8, 1917: "The Tennessee Synod helped the other synods to rise and regain their Lutheran feet. Since then she has helped them to keep their feet and to win stronger foothold." "The ministers of the Tennessee Synod,"

says Dr. Horn, "trained as they have been for the most part in the homes and companions.h.i.+p of older ministers, have not a wide and varied culture, but possess a profound acquaintance with the writings of Luther and a ready and genial knowledge of the Holy Scriptures." (_Dist.

Doctr._, 1893, 178.) In the revised const.i.tution of 1866 the original confessional statement of the Tennessee Synod, adopting the Augsburg Confession without limitation or qualification, was enlarged to include also the Apology, the Smalcald Articles, the Smaller and Larger Catechisms of Luther, and the Formula of Concord "as true Scriptural developments of the doctrines taught in the Augsburg Confession." In the same year the Tennessee Synod, following the example of her daughter, the Holston Synod, eliminated from her const.i.tution the objectionable features respecting incorporation, theological seminaries, synodical treasuries, etc. Among the Southern synods the Tennessee Synod alone adopted rules against pulpit- and altar-fellows.h.i.+p and against holding members.h.i.+p in secret societies. Her endeavors to induce the United Synod to take a similar position failed. Indeed, the original const.i.tution, submitted in 1884 at Salisbury, contained a paragraph against pulpit- and altar-fellows.h.i.+p, members.h.i.+p in lodges, and chiliasm. And when this paragraph was rejected, Polycarp Henkel, representing the Tennessee Synod, refused to vote for the const.i.tution.

In 1886 the Tennessee Synod adopted the Salisbury basis, but added a declaration which condemned chiliasm, lodge-services, pulpit- and altar-fellows.h.i.+p, and all church union and cooperation conflicting with pure Lutheran doctrine, and recommended that the United Synod embody in its by-laws a paragraph pledging theological professors to teach nothing contrary to these principles or the doctrines of the Lutheran Church. At the meeting of the United Synod in Savannah, 1887, Socrates Henkel proposed a corresponding by-law, which, however, was tabled till the next meeting. The Tennessee Synod reaffirmed its resolution with the threat that they would not cooperate with the United Synod until a by-law embodying the four points had been adopted. However, when the North Carolina Synod, with equal determination, took the opposite stand, Tennessee yielded, compromising on, and contending herself with, the resolution adopted in 1900 in which the United Synod a.s.sured the Tennessee Synod that, in their common work, they would earnestly endeavor to avoid everything that might tend to burden the consciences of brethren in any synod, and that all synods were equally bound to direct their practise and fulfil their duties according to their honest and conscientious conviction of the true and real sense of G.o.d's Word and the Confessions. Thus the Tennessee Synod, untrue to her n.o.ble traditions, finally did waive her demand for a correct Lutheran position on the part of the United Synod with reference to the four points.

Tennessee closed her eyes to the fact that she remained responsible not only for what was done conjointly with the other synods in the United Synod, but also for the practise of these synods as such. Unionism, once again, had gained the victory. And now, after decades of fraternal intercourse with the General Synod, the Tennessee Synod is organically united with the synods in opposition to which she organized in 1820.

152. Holston Synod.--The Ev. Luth. Holston Synod was organized January 2, 1861, by 11 ministers and 16 congregations (with a communicant members.h.i.+p of 1,000) residing in East Tennessee and neighboring counties of Virginia, after having received their honorable dismission for this purpose from the Tennessee Synod, which by this action was left without a single congregation or minister in the State whose name she bears. The step was taken not because of any dissatisfaction with the doctrinal position of the Tennessee Synod, but on account of the inconvenience and expensiveness of attending her conventions. However, the peculiar att.i.tude of the Tennessee Synod toward theological seminaries, incorporation, synodical treasuries, etc., contributed to the separation. (_Holston Minutes_, 1861 ff.) In his Quartocentennial Address, 1886, Dr. A.J. Brown, for more than twenty-five years president of the Holston Synod, stated: "There was at the time of her formation, and had been for some time prior to this, considerable dissatisfaction with the const.i.tution of the Tennessee Synod, and strong efforts were being made to have it amended. It was contended by the advocates of reform that that instrument contained features and prohibitions which cramped and crippled the energies of the Church in the prosecution of her sublime mission, and that it no longer reflected the views of the whole Synod." The Holston Synod, then, did not model her polity after that of the mother synod. (_Minutes_, 1886.) But, while this was undoubtedly a progress in the right direction, the strict Lutheranism of the Holston Synod did not prove to be as p.r.o.nounced and consistent as that of the Tennessee Synod had been. In 1886 the Holston Synod numbered 15 pastors and 27 congregations, with a communicant members.h.i.+p of 2,000, compared with 1,800 communicant members at present. The minutes of the Holston Synod record numerous reports and resolutions with respect to Mosheim Inst.i.tute, which, however, proved to be a failure.

153. Sound Doctrinal Position.--As a preliminary basis the Holston Synod, in 1861, adopted the Augsburg Confession and Luther's Smaller Catechism, at the same time declaring that "we do not intend to repudiate the rest of the Symbolical Books so called, and unlutheranize those who adopt them in connection with the Symbols which we have adopted, because we are satisfied that they, rightly understood and explained, contain nothing contrary to our doctrinal basis, and that we will, therefore, not refuse to fellows.h.i.+p those who adopt the collective body of the Symbolical Books as their Confessional Basis." (_Minutes_, 1861, 6.) Owing to the unsettled state of affairs in consequence of the Civil War, the const.i.tution was not ratified till 1865. Its second article, "Of the Confessional Basis," reads as follows: "1. We acknowledge the canonical books of the Old and New Testaments as the only infallible rule of faith and practise. 2. We acknowledge the Augsburg Confession of Faith and Luther's Smaller Catechism as a correct statement of the doctrines of the Christian system of which they treat, and no minister connected with this Synod shall hold or preach, nor shall any church connected with this Synod, or any private member of any Church so connected, hold or propagate, any doctrine which may be repugnant to these universally acknowledged symbols of the Evangelical Lutheran Church." (_Minutes_, 1865, 11.) In its revised const.i.tution of 1895 the Holston Synod adopted all the Lutheran symbols.

154. Entering Various Unions.--In 1867 the Holston Synod resolved to unite with the General Synod South. In the following year A.J. Brown reported that he had been present at the last session of the General Synod, and that he was highly pleased with the action of that Synod, and felt a.s.sured that "it would be instrumental in bringing about much good in our Lutheran Zion." (_Minutes_, 1868, 4.) In 1872, however, a resolution was adopted to withdraw from the General Synod because "there is much that is un-Lutheran in doctrine and practise in individual members" of that Synod. (7.) Two years later a union was effected with the General Council. (_Minutes_, 1874, 13.) In 1880 the delegate to the General Council "presented in glowing words the intellect, the breadth of view, the depth and elegance of culture, the sincere love and burning zeal for the soul and G.o.d's holy truth, of those composing that body."

(19.) In 1885 the Holston Synod endorsed the action of the Diet held at Salisbury (1884), and declared its readiness to join the remainder of the Southern Lutheran synods, on that basis, to form a General Union.

(11.) In his Presidential Report, 1886, A.J. Brown stated with respect to the Salisbury agreement: "I will barely add that the union was effected without any compromise of principle or proper feeling of self-respect on either side, and on a basis strictly Lutheran, and with a unanimity unprecedented in the history of similar movements." (7.) In 1890 the delegate to the United Synod reported: "While united in doctrine, it is to be regretted that we are not so fully united in practise, as was made apparent by the action of the United Synod on the 'By-laws, Rules of Order, and Regulations,' and particularly in regard to work. This section, which is the bone of contention, embraces substantially the celebrated 'Four Points.' And even here the difference is not so much in principle as in the practical application of principles. There are extremes on both sides. An attempt to embody the Four Points' in our basis of union would have defeated the organic union of our Southern Church in one general body; the adoption of the regulation in question would now disrupt it. We advise moderation. The union of our Church in the South is of too much importance to be broken up, or even hazarded by the adoption of any measures not clearly required by our doctrinal standards, or of doubtful expediency." (15.) Thus also with the Holston Synod union had become the primary, unity a secondary consideration.

COMMON SERVICE.

155. A Chief Bond of Union.--The relations of the United Synod with the General Council and the General Synod were of a most cordial nature, manifesting themselves in the exchange of fraternal delegates (established by Southern General Synod in 1878) and in various cooperations, especially in the preparation and use of the Common Service. Concerning the exchange of delegates the sentiment was voiced again and again: "It was the joy of the members of the United Synod to have present the brethren of those bodies, to dwell together in goodly fellows.h.i.+p for a little season. Every heart was glad to feel that we were one in the faith and usage of the Evangelical Lutheran Church."

Also with respect to the United Synod the Merger in 1918 came as a ripe fruit of the cordial relations which had been cultivated for decades.

One of the chief bonds of union during this period was the Common Service, for which the United Synod justly claimed to be ent.i.tled to special credit. The first impulse for such a unity in service came from H.M. Muhlenberg. In a letter of November 5, 1783, four years before his death, he expressed the desire "that it would be a most delightful and advantageous thing if all the Evangelical Lutheran congregations in North America were united with one another by using the same order of service." Among others who later entertained the same wish was Charles Philip Krauth. In a letter to his son, April 2, 1857, he said: "Whilst I am anxious for such an agreement in regard to a doctrinal basis as will embrace all the wings of Lutheranism in our country, I very much wish we could agree on forms of wors.h.i.+p in accordance with the liturgical character of our Church, and erect a barrier against the Fanaticism and Methodism which so powerfully control some of our ministers and people." (Spaeth, _C.P. Krauth_, 1, 380.) _The English Liturgy_ (1860), the _Church Book_ (1868), and the _Kirchenbuch_ (1877) of the Pennsylvania Synod and the _Book of Wors.h.i.+p_ of the General Synod, South, may be regarded as preliminary steps toward the realization of this wish.

156. Cooperation of General Bodies.--In a letter to the convention of the General Synod South, at Winchester, Va., 1870, Dr. Bachman of Charleston, four years before his death, expressed it as the strongest desire of his heart that all English-speaking Lutherans should have a common service. Pursuant to, and in accordance with, this request the General Synod South in 1874 elected a committee to prepare "The Common Service for the Use of Evangelical Lutheran Congregations." In 1876 Synod proposed negotiations on this matter with the General Synod and the General Council. The General Council, in 1879, resolved to cooperate, "provided the rule which shall decide all questions in its [Common Service] preparation shall be: The common consent of the pure Lutheran liturgies of the sixteenth century, and, when there is not an entire agreement among them, the consent of the largest number of those of greatest weight." In 1883 the General Synod declared her readiness to cooperate in accordance with the rule proposed by the General Council.

The work was completed by a Joint Committee appointed by the three general bodies, B.M. Schmucker serving as chairman. In 1888 the _Common Service_ appeared in two editions, one published at Columbia, S.C., by the United Synod South, the other at Philadelphia by the General Synod.

In his preface to the Southern edition B.M. Schmucker said: "The Common Service here presented is intended to reproduce in English the consensus of these pure Lutheran Liturgies. It is therefore no new Service, such as the personal tastes of those who have prepared it would have selected and arranged; but it is the old Lutheran Service, prepared by men whom G.o.d raised up to reform the Service, as well as the life and doctrine of the Church, and whom He plenteously endowed with the gifts of the Holy Ghost.... This Common Service is in its newest parts as old as the time of the Reformation," etc. The work of the committee was approved by the three cooperating general bodies. The General Synod ratified it in 1885 and adopted the Ma.n.u.script in 1887. The efforts made at the conventions in 1880, 1891, and 1893 to rescind this action failed. The Common Service was adopted also by the Iowa Synod, the Joint Synod of Ohio, and the English District of the Missouri Synod. But, while every Lutheran will rejoice at this success, it must not be overlooked that liturgical similarity dare never take the place of doctrinal unity. In 1873, in a public letter, the secretary of the East Pennsylvania Synod declared that similarity of ceremonies in the whole synod was of greater import than unity in confession (_L. u. W._ 1873, 153.) Perhaps, this was exceptional. However, it does not appear that the bodies cooperating in preparing the Common Service developed a corresponding energy and determination in bringing about a true Lutheran unity in doctrine and practise. Yet, unity in doctrine is of divine obligation and of the very essence of the Lutheran Church, while similarity in ceremonies, desirable and advantageous as it may be, is, and always must remain, a matter of expediency and Christian liberty.

THE END OF VOLUME II.