USA > Ohio > History of the Evangelical Lutheran Joint Synod of Ohio and other states from the earliest beginnings to 1919 > Part 10
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18
We, as a nation, have been passing through the fires. Our troubles and sufferings have been many. The war has been a terrible one, and now as the sun of peace was begin- ning to shine upon us, another cloud must cast a gloom over the nation. It is right that whilst we sorrow we should humble ourselves before Him who rules over all, and con- fess that the chastisement is well deserved - that in wrath God remembered mercy still.
But because nothing can befall us without our heavenly Father's permission, we do not despair, remem- bering that He makes all work for good to His children. To Him we address our prayers, that our grief may be mitigated, and that all fiendish plans may be baffled, and His own merciful will accomplished. Let us not forget to pray to Him for our rulers and our people, that wickedness may be put to shame and righteousness triumph. To Him let us commend all, and we need fear nothing; then all things must work together for good according to His mercy."
The Synod and Lodgery.
It is to be expected that the "Lodge Question" would have some history in the Joint Synod. A Synod striving for uncompromising faithfulness to Christ Jesus as the Savior of the world would naturally come into contact and conflict with any deistic or anti-Christian influence.
In the earlier years of the Synod there seemed to be
153
STEADILY FORWARD.
PROF. H. ERNST, D. D.
154
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
little or no cause for warning against the evils of secretism. The fathers were not secretists and lodges were not making inroads among the plain, sturdy and independent Lutheran settlers of the frontier.
But gradually, especially along about 1850, lodgery began to make inroads. Strange as it may seem now, one of the pioneer pastors became a prominent Mason. He seemed also to delight in giving the cult publicity. This man was none other than Rev. Andrew Henkel, a man of noble parentage, his father Paul Henkel being one of the early missionary pastors of our Synod, his brothers, four of them, were active in both the Ohio and Tennessee Synods. Licensed to the Ministry already in 1811 by the Minis- terium of Pennsylvania he was one of the founders and pillars of our Synod for many years, but it seems Masonry turned his head and in the later years of his life he began to tear down what he had built up in his earlier years. We do not want to be harsh in judgment but it would seem that at times at least he had allowed the very fundamentals of Christian faith to slip away from him. He at times preached deism and universalism. Of course all the while he was considered a good Mason.
With a prominent pastor taking the lead it is not hard to see that there should be a following, not only among the pastors but also among the laymen. Especially in the En- glish District was there a movement towards lodgery.
The Western District in 1852 was asked by one of its pastors to state its position on "Secret Societies." Synod replied : "As this is a matter which has already caused dis- turbance in many places and has destroyed the peace of the Church where it has been agitated, be it therefore re- solved: That Synod deem it unnecessary to take up the matter at this time for further consideration; but that the brethren be admonished not to join a society whose prin-
155
STEADILY FORWARD.
ciples are opposed to the spirit of the Ev. Lutheran Church."
From this resolution we can readily see that at least the Western District was not anxious to discuss a question that would likely create disturbance. The brethren were perhaps unduly timid but it was largely because of the lack of unanimity among the brethren and because of the one astute protagonist of Masonry in the Western District.
Let us not forget that this was the time when the Synod was gradually emerging from a somewhat lax and com- promising Lutheranism to a firmer and more consistent practice. The Synod was in the making. Any undue haste or drastic measures might have resulted disastrously. As it was, our Synod lost heavily in numbers and prestige in some quarters because she finally planted herself squarely upon the Confessions of the Church whose name she bore and whose banner she carried.
In 1854 a committee in compliance with a request from two pastors of Synod formulated the following resolutions for Synod's adoption : I. Resolved: That the Synod re- gards as unchurchly, all societies outside of the Church, and particularly secret societies, whenever they aim to ac- complish those objects which the Christian Church accord- ing to the Word of God has, and ever must have in view, because they are not only rendered unnecessary by the establishment of the Church, but because they are calcu- lated to produce indifference towards the Kingdom of Christ, and in many cases entire estrangement from Chris- tianity and even gross infidelity.
2. Resolved: That we regard the so-called Protestant Union of Pennsylvania as belonging to the above class of societies ; and that in addition we find the following things objectionable in it: It stands upon unionistic ground; it interferes with the office that God has given the civil gov-
156
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
ernment ; and finally it arrogates to itself Christ's office of protection over His Church.
5. Resolved: That .... in the future we will admit no one into our connection who belongs to said societies.
The above report was considered item by item and finally,
"Resolved: That the same in all its parts be adopted.
Rev. A. Henkel and H. Heinecke gave notice that they did not coincide with No. 5 of the above report and that they must therefore vote against the adoption of this par- ticular resolution."
A committee composed of W. F. Lehmann and M. Loy was to bring a recommendation with reference to the Secret Society question before the Joint Synod convening in Delaware, 1856. These brethren brought a rather ex- haustive discussion of the whole secret society business, ex- amining it from the standpoint of Christ and the Sacred Scriptures.
The report of the committee, briefly given, is as fol- lows: "That this Synod regards as unchurchly all societies outside of the Church, and particularly secret societies, whenever they aim at accomplishing the purposes which the Church according to the Word of God has and must have; inasmuch as they are not only rendered unnecessary by the Church but are also calculated to promote indifference towards the Kingdom of Jesus Christ; nay, often produce infidelity and total alienation from Christianity." This re- port of the committee was adopted by the Synod there assembled and the same requested to be published in the Lutheran Standard and Lutheran Herald.
While this pronouncement of Synod does not speak of disciplinary measures against secretists, it nevertheless makes it plain that Synod regards lodgery as opposed to the Church and dangerous to Christian faith. And as we
I57
STEADILY FORWARD.
saw from the resolution of '54, Synod was moving in the direction of finally disentangling herself from secretism.
At Galion in 1860 Joint Synod further resolved : "That this Synod advise the different Districts to admonish their members to withdraw from such societies as are men- tioned in the resolutions of 1854 and that the advice be given our congregations to proceed in the same manner with reference to their individual members."
REV. H. A. ALLWARDT, D. D.
We find no further synodical pronouncement on the Lodge Question until 1888. This of course does not mean that in the meantime nothing was done in the matter or that Synod had become indifferent in a matter which she once considered so vital. On the contrary, testimony against secretism rang from practically every pulpit, and the congregations were comparatively free from the evil.
But in 1888 a Detroit Conference asked Synod for a
.
158
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
pronouncement with reference to secretists being admitted to the Lord's Supper. The following answer was given : "The rule among us must be and ever remain that members of secret societies cannot be received as members of our congregations nor may they continue their membership or be admitted to the Holy Supper an indefinite length of time."
In 1894 the following resolution was passed by Joint Synod : "We thank God that many of our congregations, according to the rule already adopted, have taken a decided stand against all secret orders and we will earnestly pray and labor that all, sooner or later, may take the same de- cided stand."
These resolutions clearly set forth the spirit of Synod with reference to secretism. It is very difficult in these days of indifference to carry out a strict practice in this matter, yet we feel confident that the Truth must finally prevail.
CHAPTER VI.
1866-1881.
EFFORTS 'AT LUTHERAN UNION.
The Joint Synod and the General Council.
In 1866 the old Pennsylvania Synod withdrew from the General Synod at the convention at Fort Wayne, Ind. The grounds for withdrawal were the too un-Lutheran and unconstitutional action on the part of the general body in admitting the Franckean Synod which had not subscribed to the Augsburg Confession. A number of other synods also withdrew from the General Synod on the same grounds.
In 1866 the Pennsylvania Synod sent out an invitation to all Lutheran synods accepting the Unaltered Augsburg Confession to participate in the formation of a new general body upon distinctively Lutheran principles.
Of course, the Joint Synod was also among those in- vited. The convention met at Reading, Pa., in December of 1866. The Joint Synod cheerfully accepted the invitation to send delegates. This was an opportunity to aid in bring- ing to a realization the wish expressed by President Wagen- hals already in 1853 and devoutly hoped and prayer for in all those years. Here are his words: "No event, my breth- ren, could be more desirable and more conducive to the prosperity of our church in this western land than a union of all Evangelical Lutheran Synods in one general synod. Many of the now existing evils in our church might thereby be obviated or entirely removed. And if, as we have one
(159)
160
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
Bible, we had one Catechism, one Liturgy, one Hymn Book, etc., in the German and English languages ; and other books were prepared by orthodox ministers and laymen of the church and carefully examined, and approved and pub- lished by the general Synod, much good might be effected. The necessary books and other church publications could be furnished with more facility and at lower rates. Our Home and Foreign Missionary Societies could operate more efficiently, and the influence of an intimate union of the church would, in every respect, be a salutary one. How much might not be effected by united and brotherly co- operation, and our church in America, how strong would she not grow in the Lord?
But a union of the church in order to be permanent and accomplish all this, must not be a mere outward one, but one spirit, one mind should animate the entire body. As we have one Lord and one Baptism so should we also have one faith and one confession. This confession the Evangelical Lutheran Church has most unequivocally ex- pressed in her symbolical books."
President Loy in his report to Joint Synod in 1866 strongly urges Synod to do all she can to bring about a union of all Lutheran synods faithfully adhering to the confessions of the Church. To this end he recommends the sending of delegates to a convention where preliminary steps looking towards such a union are to be taken. At the same meeting Synod practically adopted the recom- mendation of the President, and elected the following breth- ren as a committee to represent the Synod at a preliminary union conference: Profs. F. W. Lehmann and M. Loy; Pastors G. H. Trebel and S. Baechler. The committee was not given plenary power, but was to report its findings back to Synod for further consideration. The convention of Lutheran Synods was held at Reading, Pa., in December of
16I
EFFORTS AT LUTHERAN UNION.
1866. It seems that of the committee only Profs. Lehmann and Loy attended. Loy says of the convention : "Circum- stances were favorable to a calm discussion of vital ques- tions regarding the unity of the Church and getting to- gether and ultimately growing together, by participation in the same life with its divine power, did not seem to me impossible. As I was honored with the appointment, which I accepted with trembling, to preach the opening sermon, I had a good opportunity to say, at the very outset, what in my judgment the situation required, and I said it as plainly and as frankly as if I had been addressing our own Synod. The sermon was well received, not a complaint was made that its note was too high ; the speeches and actions of the convention were pitched in the same key and all was har- monious. To me the outlook was even more hopeful when the convention adjourned than when it was opened."
In this same spirit of hopefulness the committee re- ported back to Joint Synod, which convened in extra ses- sion at Hamilton, O., in June, 1867.
Much time was taken up at this meeting in discussing the proposed general synod, and there seemed to be a gen- eral desire to proceed-but cautiously. The constitution of the proposed union should be carefully examined and should any changes be thought necessary the same should be laid before the Joint Synod. Delegates should be sent to the meeting of representatives of the various synods, but with instructions to inform the body that the Joint Synod could unite only on condition that a position be taken against all un-Lutheran practice which might be found in this or that synod desiring admission to the gen- eral body. Let it not be thought that in taking this stand our Synod wanted to spin out a theory or even quibble. She was, indeed, in an embarrassing position. She saw that
11
162
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
the synods desiring to enter the General Council, as it was now called, were ready to subscribe to all the confessions of the Lutheran Church; at the same time she knew of un-Lutheran teaching and practice in some of the bodies.
-
MARTIN LUTHER CHURCH, BALTIMORE, MD.
In the face of this knowledge she could not honestly keep quiet. She at least must make inquiry. And this she did. Her inquiry culminated in the much discussed "Four Points." These were concerning, Chiliasm, Altar Fellow- ship, Pulpit Fellowship and Secret Societies. She wanted
163
EFFORTS AT LUTHERAN UNION.
the newly formed Council to declare itself against the un- Lutheran practices which these four points involved. This the Council would not do, perhaps we should say, could not do, as there were those in her midst who were chiliasts, unionists or perhaps secretists. The General Council, not declaring herself on these points, which the Joint Synod could not conscientiously pass by, the much desired and much worked-for union was not effected. The then exist- ing English District of the Joint Synod, however, did join the Council and, finally, after some stormy controversy, withdrew from the Joint Synod.
After the lapse of many years, when all personal ani- mosities have died away, it might be argued that it would have been better for the Lutheran Church at large had Ohio gone into the General Council at that time; that by association and continued testimony within the Council she would have wielded a stronger influence on behalf of con- sistent Lutheran practice than she could do by holding aloof. It is further asserted that Ohio was also not without her inconsistencies. Granted, but it is yet to be shown that the Joint Synod was not contending for consistent Lutheranism, and if she was right, as she believed she was, it was her duty to stand where she did. She allowed many external advantages to pass by for the sake of her confessional posi- tion. Some of the acrimony and unguarded personalities that passed the lips of some of the contenders should, of course, never have been uttered. Some of the heads should have kept cooler and some of the hearts warmer, but the history of the entire Lutheran Church since that time has vindicated the soundness of the position taken by Ohio at the formation of the General Council.
We look hopefully into the future and trust the day is not far distant when all Lutheran synods in this broad land of ours may stand shoulder to shoulder in contention
164
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
for the faith once delivered to the saints. And our prayer on the threshold of our second century is that we, the Joint Synod of Ohio, may be standing among them. We have no desire to be selfish, our purpose in this matter is to serve the cause of unity in the great Church whose hon- ored name we bear.
The Joint Synod and the Synodical Conference.
Though our Synod could not see her way clear to join the newly organized General Council she did therefore not give up the hope that the more conservative synods not joining the Council could be united into one body.
Already in 1868 the Joint Synod found herself much in doctrinal harmony with the growing Missouri Synod. Some became even enthusiastic and wanted to enter into an "amalgamation" at once, but as usual, Synod moved slowly and cautiously. The following basis of union was drawn up and signed by representatives of both synods :
"Both synods mutually acknowledge each other as orthodox. Synodical congregations are all those which have the right of representation in synod. In the calling of a pastor from the one synod to a congregation of the other synod it is considered right and proper that the pas- tor join the synod to which the congregation belongs. If he does not desire to do this he should not accept the call. In the reception of pastors, congregations and members both synods shall require a testimonial of good standing and in general exercise synodical discipline."
Signed for Missouri: C. F. W. Walther, H. Schwan and F. Lochner; for Ohio: W. F. Lehmann, M. Loy and F. A. Herzberger.
At the next meeting of the Joint Synod in 1870 a com- mittee of five pastors including the president of Synod was elected to continue the correspondence already begun with
165
EFFORTS AT LUTHERAN UNION.
Missouri and with as many other orthodox synods as de- sire to take part in the efforts to get together. The results of the work of this committee were to be communicated to the officers of the Joint Synod who should have power to call an extra session of Synod if in their judgment such should be advisable. Professors Lehmann and Loy were chosen as delegates to attend the next meeting of the Mis- souri Synod.
The matter of forming a union of the conservative synods was extensively discussed by the districts of the Joint Synod at their annual meetings immediately follow- ing the convention of 1870.
In 1871 a meeting took place at Chicago to which Mis- souri, Wisconsin, Ohio and the Norwegian Synods sent delegates. The organization of a Synodical Conference was suggested at this meeting. Later a conference was held at Ft. Wayne to which the Minnesota and Illinois Synods also sent delegates and where the matter of uniting was further discussed.
The result of this important meeting was the forma- tion of the Synodical Conference, the largest body of Lu- therans in America.
At the Joint Synod convening in. Bucyrus in 1872 the constitution of the newly organized Synodical Conference was unanimously adopted, thereby ratifying the action of Ohio's delegates at Ft. Wayne.
At last, after 34 years of repeated invitation and effort at Lutheran union our Ohio Synod could rejoice in an actual union with sister synods. She might have united herself long before with those who sought her company. No doubt it would have been to her external advantage. She could have extended her borders, her institutions and her influence as a force to be reckoned with. But a union without unity of faith and practice did not seem right to
I66
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
her both from the Confessions of the Church and the Word of God. But now she seemed to have found sister synods, one with her in the faith, and to them she joined herself.
It was the sense of the Chicago conference that Ohio should give up her Seminary at Columbus and unite her forces with St. Louis, especially in providing English theological instruction at that place. Her college she should move from Columbus into the midst of the strong and in-
TRINITY CHURCH AND PARSONAGE, BRUNING, NEB.
fluential congregations of both Missouri and Ohio in Pittsburgh.
The matter was seriously discussed by Joint Synod but after mature deliberation it was deemed best not to break up the pioneer institution in central Ohio and throw her forces on the wings east and west while the center of old "Ohio" should be sparsely held. In view of subsequent developments it is well that this was not done although at the time the Joint Synod knew no selfish interests. She was heart and soul in the Conference and meant to stay.
Those who had hoped that a union with the Synodical
167
EFFORTS AT LUTHERAN UNION.
Conference would mean great things for the Ohio Synod were soon to be disappointed. The danger of substituting initial strength for individual effort was present here also. The union should bring about all desired advancement without the personal effort of former years. And when this did not occur many were disappointed and some lost heart.
Another factor which tended to lame Synod's efforts was the uncertainty that seemed to exist with reference to our institutions. Should they be amalgamated with those of Missouri ; or should we change the status of Capital Uni- versity so as to make the college simply a preparatory school for the seminary ; or should we continue on the plan outlined by the founders of our school? These questions were much discussed and kept matters in a state of uncer- tainty.
Also the matter of forming state synods within the newly organized Synodical Conference was everywhere be- ing discussed. "Dr. Walther planned that state synods should be formed out of all synods, which were expected to maintain their own colleges, and also to support one grand central seminary with a tri-linguistic (German, Eng- lish, Norwegian) faculty and one teacher's seminary." Ohio was somewhat inclined to take up with this plan, as the following committee report to the Joint Synod of 1876 will show :
Your committee takes the liberty to submit to Synod the 1 proposition that a committee be appointed, which, together with a similar committee to be appointed by the Synod of Missouri shall discuss, and if possible prepare a plan of union upon some- thing like the following basis, which plan shall be submitted to the respective Synods.
a. The two synods of Ohio and Missouri shall for the present continue to exist, until the formation of State Synods
168
HISTORY OF THE EV. LUTH. JOINT SYNOD OF OHIO.
can be generally effected to which end we will henceforth labor with all faithfulness.
b. The boundary line between these two Joint Synods shall be the eastern boundary of Michigan, Indiana and Kentucky and the northern boundary of Kentucky, Tennessee and North Caro- lina - and the territory of the Joint Synod, east and north of these boundary lines shall as soon as practicable be divided into State Synods; the English Districts of our Synod however shall not for the present be limited within these boundaries.
c. Both Joint Synods shall have two seminaries in common, the one for the training of ministers and the other for teachers, which shall be under the supervision of the Synodical Conference, - provided that at least two English professors shall be employed at the seminary for ministers, and that in the seminary for teachers adequate provision shall be made to meet the wants of the English interests.
d. The colleges of the several Synods shall be conducted on the basis of the same course of instruction, in which thorough training in both the German and English languages shall be pro- vided.
This report Synod adopted after considerable discus- sion.
In 1878 at Wheeling the Joint Synod declared herself willing to reorganize into state synods as soon as all of the synods composing the Synodical Conference would ex- press a willingness to do the same. The establishing of a united seminary was again discussed and the plan warmly urged. A committee was appointed to confer with a like committee from the Missouri Synod on this important mat- ter and report to Joint Synod at its next meeting.
The next meeting came in October, 1880, at Dayton, O., and the committee, which had conferred with commit- tees appointed for the same purpose within the Synodical Conference, was ready with a rather elaborate report. We append the rather extensive plan as an evidence that at least some of the fathers of that day had a broad vision and
f
EFFORTS AT LUTHERAN UNION.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.