IN COMMEMORATION 
 
 of the 
 150th ANNIVERSARY 
 
 of the 
 
 MINISTERIUM 
 
 F 
 
 PENNSYLVANIA 
 
 1748 - 1898 
 
 BX806I 
 .PA-I3 
 


 TT CllllUVl l~JlkJlC 
 
 IN COMMEMORATION 
 
 150TH ANNIVERSARY 
 
 Ministerium of Pennsylvania 
 
 1748 - 1898. 
 
 [Reprint from the Lutheran Church Review, January and April, 1898.] 
 
^ 0F p 
 
 "APR 9 
 
 1926 
 
 LEADING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE 
 PENNSYLVANIA MINISTERIUM. 
 
 The Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsylvania 
 and adjacent states, during this year, will celebrate the one 
 hundred and fiftieth anniversary of its organization. The 
 period from 1748 to 1898 embraces the most important and 
 far-reaching events in the history of the Lutheran Church in 
 this country and covers more than one-half of its entire his- 
 tory. The history prior to the organization of the Minis- 
 terium is that of the beginnings of scattered settlements of 
 various bodies of Lutherans in widely scattered portions of 
 the country and of efforts, often futile, to secure the ministra- 
 tions of the Gospel. The year of jubilee brings with it sacred 
 memories of the past, suggests present responsibilities and 
 presents incentives for the future. 
 
 In presenting a brief outline of the leading characteristics 
 of the Ministerium, we are called upon to note the prominent 
 features in its origin and subsequent history, the position 
 which the body occupied at various times, and the influence 
 which it exerted in the general development of the Church. 
 
 The year 1748 was an epoch-making year in the history 
 of the Lutheran Church in this country. It marks the start- 
 ing point of a wider outlook, of better organization for the 
 widely scattered members of the Church, and a better, more 
 thorough and more successful oversight of the extensive ter- 
 ritory under the pastoral care of the men who had been sent 
 from Halle to labor in Pennsylvania and the neighboring 
 provinces. 
 
 The organization itself was preceded by several import- 
 ant conferences, called to consider subjects of vital import- 
 
ance to the future welfare of the Church, and which are to be 
 regarded as evidence of the care with which the fathers moved 
 in this matter. The first of these was a conference held at 
 Providence for the consideration of the subject of a suitable 
 Liturgy for the churches. This was regarded as a matter of 
 great importance for the proper conduct of public worship, 
 the administration of the sacraments and a thorough uni- 
 formity in all things pertaining to the cultus of the Church. 
 The second conference was also held at Providence and the 
 three subjects under consideration were the consecration of 
 the new St. Michael's church, the ordination of Catechist 
 Kurtz at the urgent request of the Tulpehocken people, and 
 the organization of a Synod as a closer bond of union among 
 the congregations. The matter of organization was only 
 another step in the logical succession of events. From the 
 very beginning the three congregations that had sent to 
 Germany for a pastor had been designated as " the united 
 congregations ; " and later on, as new congregations were 
 added to the number of regularly organized congregations, 
 they continued to retain the same name for all these, together 
 with the numerous preaching stations dependent upon their 
 pastors for occasional services. The next step was to unite 
 all these into a synodical organization, under uniform regula- 
 tions, so that all might enjoy the benefits of order properly 
 administered, and that all the congregations might have the 
 benefit of judicious oversight. 
 
 The Ministerium was organized in St. Michael's Church, 
 Philadelphia, August 26 (N. S.), 1748. The convention was 
 characterized by earnestness and zeal for the welfare of the 
 Church at large and by a laudable fidelity to the Confessions 
 of the Church. There were present, Muhlenberg, Brunnholtz, 
 Handschuh and Kurtz, of Pennsylvania ; John Sandin, Pro- 
 vost of the Swedish Churches ; and J. C. Hartwig, pastor of 
 congregations in the province of New York ; and lay-repre- 
 sentatives from nine congregations in Pennsylvania, and Peter 
 Kock, trustee of the Swedish Church in Philadelphia. Al- 
 though Sandin and Hartwig did not formally unite with the 
 
new Synod, they took an active part in the organization and 
 in the proceedings of the first convention, and in so far rep- 
 resented the congregations under their pastoral and official 
 care. The proceedings of this convention constitute an im- 
 portant chapter of our history, since we find in them the 
 foundation principles of the Church, and the beginning of 
 that which has become one of the strongest factors in its 
 working machinery in this country. The Synod is the source, 
 whence have emanated the most far-reaching movements 01 
 church-work in every department of activity, in the doctrine, 
 worship and life of the congregations, and in the educational, 
 missionary and benevolent operations of the same. It is the 
 bond that unites all the congregations into one body, and 
 gives force and proves helpful to the operations of the indi- 
 vidual congregations. The helpfulness and influence of the 
 Synod are not appreciated in many quarters as they deserve 
 to be ; and to this lack of appreciation is due, very largely, 
 the failure of the Synod to carry on successfully the varied 
 operations which it undertakes, from time to time. 
 
 The name adopted for this new general organization was 
 " The Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of North America." 
 In its constitution, cultus and plan of oversight we have the 
 principles of a general organization for the entire Church in 
 this country and for all time. It was oecumenical enough 
 to embrace all the congregations, and yet sufficiently specific 
 to legislate for individual congregations. The very name in- 
 dicates this oecumenical aim ; and it was retained until the 
 time when narrow-minded men changed it and contracted the 
 sphere of the activity of the organization itself. In its doc- 
 trinal position, its cultus and polity, the new Synod planted 
 itself squarely and fairly on the Confessions of the Lutheran 
 Church, and manifested its fidelity to the spirit of the Church 
 of the fathers in various ways. This is seen in the pledge 
 demanded from the first candidate for ordination, who vowed 
 that he would teach nothing, either publicly or privately, " but 
 what is conformable to the Word of God and the confessions 
 of the Evangelical Lutheran Church," and "introduce no 
 
ceremonies in the public service and administration of the 
 sacraments but those which have been introduced by the 
 college of pastors of the united congregations, and use no 
 other formula but that which has been indicated to me by 
 the same ; " in the Liturgy prepared by the pastors on the 
 basis of the approved Liturgies of the Church of the Father- 
 land and adopted at this convention ; as also in the test of 
 membership demanded of pastors and congregations apply- 
 ing for admission, according to which " every minister pro- 
 fesses that he holds the Word of God and our Symbolical 
 Books in doctrine and life." 
 
 Although this new body had no formal constitution, we 
 can without difficulty ascertain the main features of the organ- 
 ization from the records of the first convention. It was a 
 body consisting of pastors and lay members of the congrega- 
 tions served by them. The pastors were men who had been 
 officially called and commissioned by the authorities in Halle, 
 and approved by the church authorities of Hanover, as the 
 Lutheran representatives of the King of England, and of 
 other pastors concerning whose unity in the faith and the reg- 
 ularity of whose call there could be no doubt on the part of 
 the authorities in Europe. All these pastors were responsi- 
 ble to the authorities in Europe and transmitted regular re- 
 ports of their labors to them. The final decision of matters 
 brought before the body belonged to the pastors, subject, of 
 course, to the advice and approval at Halle. The lay mem- 
 bers were the church councils or some of the elders as their 
 representatives, who reported congregational matters, partici- 
 pated with the pastors in deliberations concerning churches 
 and schools, were consulted by the pastors concerning the 
 worship and activities of the churches and presented requests 
 to Synod. But this was the extent of their participation, as 
 they had no vote until long afterwards (1792). These prac- 
 tices were fixed in the first constitution and prevailed until 
 the change indicated. 
 
 Beginning with the year 1748, the history of our Church 
 in Pennsylvania is the history of the Ministerium, and from 
 
5 
 
 this date until near the close of the century it is the history 
 of the Lutheran Church in America. We must not forget 
 that, as long as Muhlenberg lived, he was the leader in all the 
 most important affairs that tended to advance the cause of the 
 Lutheran Church in Pennsylvania and the adjoining provinces, 
 and to him pastors and people looked for counsel and for the 
 proper management of their affairs, realizing that in him they 
 had a faithful and trustworthy leader. His life, therefore, is 
 closely interwoven with the men and affairs of the early period 
 of the Synod's history, and to him is due, very largely, the 
 clear and positive confessional position of the Synod at the 
 time of its organization. During this period, also, the influ- 
 ence of the Synod extended over the greater part of the 
 country where Lutherans had settled, being to all intents and 
 purposes a general body, directing the affairs and maintaining 
 order among the widely scattered congregations. Muhlen- 
 berg, as the acknowledged leader, was called to New York 
 and to Georgia, not to mention other places, to settle diffi- 
 culties and regulate affairs. This period embraces, also, the 
 formal adoption of the first synodical constitution, which in its 
 essential features forms the basis of many later constitutions. 
 It embraces the preparation and adoption of a congregational 
 constitution by Muhlenberg, with the advice and cooperation 
 of Wrangel, which has been the model for similar constitutions 
 throughout the country, even down to the present time. 
 
 From whatever standpoint the work of the Church is 
 viewed, Muhlenberg was, during his .lifetime, the leading and 
 dominant spirit in the Synod and, indeed, in the Church 
 throughout the country. His spirit of devotion to the stand- 
 ards of the Church made itself felt in every department of the 
 Church's teaching, worship and life. But he did not stand 
 alone. He was surrounded by a band, though not large, of 
 faithful colaborers, who patiently and faithfully labored for the 
 advancement of the Church. Among these were Brunnholtz, 
 Kurtz, Bager, Gerock, Krug, Voight, Schultze, Schmidt, Hel- 
 muth and Kunze, besides several of the Swedish pastors, 
 especially Dr. Wrangel. 
 
With the death of Muhlenberg in 1787 another period 
 begins. It is a period of deterioration, tainted with the spirit 
 of the age. The latter part of the eighteenth century and the 
 beginning of the nineteenth was a period of rationalism and 
 of indifferentism to sound teaching and a churchly life. It 
 lacked the health and vigor of the earlier period, when Muh- 
 lenberg and men of like spirit with him were the leaders. 
 " Its coming," says Dr. Jacobs, " may be clearly traced in the 
 preceding years, when the influence of the leader is gradually 
 withdrawn from active labors. His younger contemporaries 
 were men of the same spirit ; but the very fact that they were 
 not compelled to struggle so hard to maintain the inter- 
 ests of the Lutheran Church prevented them from rising to 
 such heroic undertakings, and also diminished the rigor with 
 which they guarded the distinctive features of Lutheranism. 
 Lutherans they all were, true to the whole body of the con- 
 fessions to which they had given their pledge ; and yet they 
 were inclined to abate somewhat in reference to the mode in 
 which this faith should be defended. They had been educated 
 under another generation of teachers at Halle, and felt the 
 influence of the weakening, although not yet of the surrender, 
 of these teachers to the fast approaching era of destructive 
 criticism. They had been pupils of Semler in theology, in the 
 first stages of his career. With the deterioration that followed 
 they were well acquainted, and looked with dismay into the 
 future that awaited the Lutheran Church in Germany. Hel- 
 muth, in whom the emotional especially predominated, poured 
 forth his sorrow and apprehension concerning the spread of 
 rationalism in a letter to the elder Muhlenberg, in 1785, which 
 the latter answered in an equally touching letter, declaring 
 that such news must only drive one to prayer, but, at the same 
 time, assuring the younger leader that all such error must, 
 according to God's Word, at last disappear, and that only the 
 truth could be permanent. The darker grew the prospect, 
 the nearer these men felt to all earnest Christians of other 
 denominations, and, while doing so, thought that some of the 
 tests heretofore necessary might be removed. That this was 
 
not done with sufficient discrimination, the result proved. 
 The founders of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania had not been 
 extremists, and a departure from their position was, in the 
 beginning, a well-meant but unfortunate compromise. This 
 was prominently manifested in the revised synodical consti- 
 tution of 1792." 
 
 The quality of American rationalism was at no time of a 
 very high order, judging it from the standpoint of intellectual 
 force. It was simply an echo, a reproduction of the elabora- 
 tions current in the fatherland and an effort to adapt it to the 
 environment of its American imitators. At most, it was merely 
 sporadic in the Church in America and its influence was not 
 very extensive. In the rural districts the more pronounced 
 forms of rationalism were to an extent current and often were 
 repelled by humble people who had been trained under more 
 wholesome influences. That it exerted no influence would 
 be a misstatement of the facts in the case. It had its full share 
 in the development of the false unionism, which at this time 
 asserted itself and attempted to break down all denominational 
 barriers, and make of religion a mere superficial morality. 
 False unionism is the twin sister of indifferentism, and ration- 
 alism in one form or another has always been the mother of 
 both. The spirit of rationalism is essentially narrow, vague 
 and superficial. We see this manifested in various ways, in 
 connection with the history of the Synod. The synodical 
 constitution underwent a number of important changes. The 
 same is true of the Liturgy, which had been in use nearly half 
 a century. The most serious change, however, was the elimi- 
 nation of all confessional tests, leaving out all reference either 
 to the Augsburg Confession or to the other symbolical books, 
 so prominent in the first constitution. The result of this was 
 great inconsistencies in teaching and practice, without, how- 
 ever, " any express renunciation of the distinctive doctrines of 
 Lutheranism, which always had outspoken confessors among 
 the more prominent members." The Ministerium still re- 
 mained a Lutheran body ; but in many ways it showed a lack 
 of the true consciousness of the spirit of the Church. Hence, 
 
8 
 
 compromises became possible and unionism with denomina- 
 tions was advocated and practiced. Attempts were even made 
 to unite the Lutheran and Reformed churches and the estab- 
 lishment of a college and theological seminary for both com- 
 munions in common. Another indication of the tendency was 
 the publication, in 1817, of a union hymn book, which was 
 intended to take the place of the one prepared in 1787 by 
 Muhlenberg, Kunze and Helmuth, and which was intended 
 for the use of both Lutherans and Reformed and recom- 
 mended by the synods of both churches in Pennsylvania. 
 
 There is still another indication of the spirit of the times. 
 " It is that of not a few pastors, orthodox in the general sense 
 of the term, not from deep personal conviction, but from intel- 
 lectual indolence and motives of expediency. Settled in the 
 midst of large parishes of from six to twelve congregations, 
 ministering to an uneducated rural population, they preached 
 the Word of God, but were occupied with the secular demands 
 of their farms as much as with the spiritual interests of their 
 people. That close personal dealing with individual souls that 
 characterized the ministry of Muhlenberg and Brunnholtz was 
 an impossibility. The pastor scarcely knew, even by name, 
 the thousands of members in his parish, as he passed on Sun- 
 day, with all haste, from one church to another. A few vol- 
 umes of sermons, from which to gather material ready for 
 prompt use in the pulpit, and the local newspaper, were prob- 
 ably the sole reading with which he supplemented the theo- 
 logical course he had received from some pastor thoroughly 
 preoccupied with other duties. . . . There were no edu- 
 cational or missionary enterprises that could enlist their inter- 
 est. Was it a wonder that, under a ministry thus secularized, 
 the hearing of the Word and the receiving of the sacraments 
 degenerated into purely mechanical services, that church dis- 
 cipline almost completely vanished, and that, amidst the great 
 progress which the last three-quarters of a century has wit- 
 nessed within these congregations, the relics of this ecclesi- 
 astical semi-barbarism have not altogether passed away?" 
 (Jacobs.) Nevertheless, a statement like this dare not be per- 
 
mitted to pass without another statement of the fact that this 
 condition of things in some parts of the synodical territory- 
 was not allowed to go on without protest by the Synod itself. 
 Early in the present century there was an awakening, 
 both in Europe and America, from the spirit of rationalism of 
 the closing years of the previous century. A more positive 
 faith began to manifest itself, and this had its effect in quicken- 
 ing a higher appreciation of the confessions and the faith in- 
 volved in them. This awakening and consequent renewed 
 activity of the Church in its proper sphere of evangelical teach- 
 ing and life, may very largely be ascribed to the impulse af- 
 forded by the celebration of the ter-centenary of the Reform- 
 ation, in 1 8 17. It led to renewed study of the Reformation 
 principles and the writings of Luther, and brought out a litera- 
 ture of an entirely different character from that which is the 
 natural fruit of rationalism, indifferentism and false unionism. 
 The Ministerium took a leading part in this forward move- 
 ment. Not only were the standards of the Church subjected 
 to a careful study ; but the desire arose for a more general 
 union among the Lutherans in this country, both for protec- 
 tion against outside influences and for united efforts in the 
 advancement of its own affairs, in the line of education, mis- 
 sions and benevolence. In 1818 the Ministerium resolved, 
 that "in its judgment, it would be well if the different Evan- 
 gelical Lutheran Synods in the United States were to stand, 
 in some way or other, in true union with one another." Cor- 
 respondence was opened with the few other Synods, then in 
 existence, and the result was the organization of the General 
 Synod in 1821. Although, already in 1823, the Ministerium 
 withdrew its connection with this general body, this was due 
 " to the fact that the leaders of that Synod were unable to 
 overcome the opposition of the congregations in the rural dis- 
 tricts " to connection with the body, and not to a change of 
 mind with reference to the desirability of a union and of united 
 action for the advancement of the Church. For thirty years 
 the Ministerium maintained an independent position ; but dur- 
 ing this period it moved steadily forward and onward in quick- 
 
IO 
 
 ening the Lutheran consciousness of its people, establishing 
 order in its congregations, and so preparing pastors and con- 
 gregations to go safely through another period of disturbance 
 by which the General Synod was largely influenced and af- 
 fected. 
 
 From one extreme men are liable to swing to another. 
 So it was in the early decades of the present century. After 
 the period of rationalism had spent its force, the Church to a 
 very large extent was pervaded by fanaticism. In the Lutheran 
 Church of this country many were drawn away from the true 
 spirit of the Church into the current of fanatical movements, 
 called " new measures." This was nothing more than the 
 adoption of emotional and methodistic methods in carry- 
 ing on church work. It brought along with it a disregard for 
 sound evangelical teaching and catechetical instruction, and 
 resulted in the holding of protracted, so-called, revival meet- 
 ings, characterized by the wildest excitement and irreligious 
 practices. But in this matter the Ministerium remained firm 
 in its adherence to the evangelical principles and teachings of 
 the Lutheran Church, and strongly opposed the introduction 
 of what were called " new measures." Indeed, this movement 
 had the happy effect of bringing the Ministerium to a clearer 
 confessional position and a re-establishment, on a clearer and 
 more positive basis, of its original confessional position. It 
 had gone through the fires of rationalism and fanaticism, and 
 came out of them purified of much of the dross that had ac- 
 cumulated during the past years of its existence, and marks 
 the beginning of movements the results of which became mani- 
 fest only in later years. 
 
 This return to the confessions, on the part of the Minis- 
 terium, had a beneficial effect on other portions of the Church, 
 among those who had been led away from the confessions and 
 drawn into the current of emotional and fanatical religionism. 
 The spirit of improvement began to manifest itself also in the 
 General Synod ; and, as the conservative element of this body 
 grew in strength and decision, the prospects of drawing into 
 it a large portion of the independent Synods grew brighter. 
 
II 
 
 In 1853 tne Ministerium, which was then the largest and most 
 influential Synod in existence, re-entered the General Synod 
 and threw its influence on the side of the conservative and 
 confessional position. 
 
 The confessional position which the Ministerium took, at 
 this time, is set forth very clearly in a series of resolutions 
 adopted by it and placed on record at the time of entering the 
 General Synod. They are here given : 
 
 " Whereas, the Evangelical Lutheran Church has, of late, arrived at clearer 
 views of its doctrinal and other distinctive features ; and whereas, we are justified 
 in expecting that both the internal and external welfare of our Church will be 
 thereby essentially promoted ; and whereas, we recognize the importance of an 
 historico-confessional basis for the Church ; therefore, 
 
 "Resolved, (a) That we also, in common with the Evangelical Lutheran Church 
 of our fathers, acknowledge the collective body of the symbolical books as the 
 historico-confessional writings of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, and that we, 
 also, like the Evangelical Lutheran Church of former times, accord to the Unaltered 
 Augsburg Confession and Luther's Small Catechism an especial importance among 
 our symbolical books generally, (b) That we enjoin it upon all the ministers and 
 candidates of our Church, as their duty, to make themselves better and more 
 thoroughly acquainted with these venerable documents of the faith of our fathers 
 than has hitherto been the case with many, (c) That it is not by any means our 
 intention thereby to diminish the absolute authority of the Holy Scriptures, but 
 much rather to place them in the clearest light possible, and that we by no means 
 design through these symbols to place constraint upon the consciences of any, but 
 much rather through them to bind the conscience to the Holy Scriptures, as the 
 divine source of truth." 
 
 But the struggle for a positive, confessional Lutheranism 
 was by no means ended by this clear declaration of principles. 
 It continued for a number of years and resulted in the division 
 in 1866, when the Ministerium and a number of other Synods 
 withdrew from the General Synod. The next step in the line 
 of development and advancement was the organization of the 
 General Council, in 1866 and 1867, on a clear and positive 
 confessional basis. Here, again, the Ministerium took a lead- 
 ing position, both in the organization, the adoption of its prin- 
 ciples of faith and polity and in the prosecution of the work 
 coming under the control of the new body. For thirty years 
 this Synod has been one of the leading factors of this general 
 body, organized for the purpose of uniting the conservative 
 
12 
 
 elements of the Lutheran Church in this country into one 
 body, for the propagation of truth and the advancement of 
 the Church. 
 
 The Ministerium has for many years been active in the 
 work of missions, both at home and abroad, though it has 
 never come up to the full measure of its ability in this direc- 
 tion. In 1S37 a society was organized for the purpose of 
 carrying on more effective work beyond its immediate bounds. 
 It was the prime mover in establishing a mission in India, in 
 1 841, and sent out Father Heyer to begin the work. In 1868, 
 when the General Synod no longer felt able to support the 
 Rajahmundry District, the Ministerium again took hold of the 
 work and supported the missionaries until the following year, 
 when the entire work was transferred to the General Council. 
 Meanwhile, however, the Ministerium has continued one of 
 the strongest supporters of the General Council's flourishing 
 mission in India. For more than half a century the mission 
 in India has received the care and support of this Synod, and 
 its missionaries are members of the body. 
 
 In the matter of education, in later years, the Ministerium 
 has manifested great interest. The great lack from the be- 
 ginning was that of suitable educational facilities for the train- 
 ing of men for the ministry in institutions of the Church and 
 in its spirit. Muhlenberg and his faithful colaborers earn- 
 estly longed and labored for institutions for the higher Chris- 
 tian education of the people. Efforts were made in this di- 
 rection, during the lifetime of Muhlenberg; but they proved 
 failures, since the Church was then not yet in a position to 
 undertake and carry on work of this kind. Reference has 
 already been made to the effort, on the part of the Minis- 
 terium, to secure educational advantages for its people in 
 connection with Franklin College and Seminary. Providen- 
 tially and happily for the future welfare of the Lutheran 
 Church in Pennsylvania, this proved an utter failure. When 
 the institutions were established at Gettysburg, the Minis- 
 terium again aided in their establishment and looked to them 
 for the training of its young men ; but for various reasons 
 
13 
 
 this also proved a disappointment. It was found that in 
 order to train up a homogeneous ministry for the Church and 
 afford educational advantages to all its people in the spirit of 
 the Church, institutions were needed on the territory of the 
 Synod and under direct synodical control. The desired re- 
 sults could not be attained in any other way. Hence, the 
 necessity was forced upon the Synod to make a new begin- 
 ning in this department of church work. 
 
 The Theological Seminary at Philadelphia was founded 
 in 1864. It was established and has been fostered by the 
 Ministerium, almost without any outside aid. From small 
 and insignificant beginnings it has grown to be one of the 
 strongest and most influential institutions of its kind in the 
 Lutheran Church of this country. From the beginning to 
 the present, it has always had an exceptionally able faculty 
 From the two Schaeffers, Krauth, Mann (under whom it was 
 the writer's privilege to study) to the present faculty, the 
 seminary has had a succession of instructors of whom any in- 
 stitution can well be proud. The results attained have by no 
 means been insignificant. Every synod of the General Coun- 
 cil, and other synods, have been benefited by this institution. 
 The conservatism and the spirit of fidelity to the confessions 
 of the Church that have been impressed upon the minds of 
 those who have here received their theological training, can- 
 not help but be of incalculable benefit to the Church at large. 
 
 Three years after the establishment of the Seminary, 
 Muhlenberg College, at Allentown, was founded under partial 
 control of the Ministerium. Ten years later, it came under 
 the full control of the synod and has since been maintained 
 by the same. Space forbids more than a mere passing notice 
 of its aims and work. For a more complete history of the 
 college, the reader is referred to the " Quarter-Centennial 
 Memorial Volume," published in 1892. Deeply interested, 
 as I am in this department of church work and in the college 
 itself, I can not permit this occasion to pass without a reference 
 to the aim which was before those who labored for this insti- 
 tution of the synod. This was the establishment of a synodical 
 
14 
 
 college of a high literary and religious standard, in which 
 young men could be trained in the spirit of the Lutheran 
 Church for the Theological Seminary at Philadelphia, for the 
 various learned professions and for other pursuits in life, and 
 thus give the Church an educated ministry as well as an 
 educated laity. 
 
 The establishment of these institutions meant an important 
 step forward in the operations of the Ministerium, and was 
 the actualization of the cherished plans of its pious, earnest, 
 faithful and eminent founders. A son of both institutions, I 
 am proud to bear testimony to the self-denying, earnest and 
 faithful labors of the able scholars of the Church who have 
 given their lives for the work of educating the young in our 
 Church institutions, and am free to say that both these insti- 
 tutions of our synod deserve all the financial and moral help 
 that the members of our congregations are able to give, a 
 great deal more than has been done in the past. The best is 
 not too good for them. 
 
 In the matter of benevolence, the Ministerium has not 
 always come up to the full measure of its ability. There have 
 been palliating circumstances in various periods of its history. 
 In the earlier years, these were the poverty, the trials and 
 struggles of the members of the congregations to gain a foot- 
 hold in this new country. The scarcity of ministers led to 
 the formation of large parishes, which are still maintained in 
 some portions of our synodical territory, a state of affairs that 
 is not conducive to the cultivation of the spirit of benevolence. 
 These large parishes are happily becoming things of the past ; 
 and with their disappearance and the establishment of smaller 
 parishes, with more frequent services, and the more regular 
 ministrations of the Gospel, improvements are being made all 
 along the line. And yet, the Ministerium has not been alto- 
 gether remiss in the benevolent operations of the Church. Its 
 interest in missions at home and abroad, its participation in 
 the establishment of various educational institutions and the 
 maintenance of its own orphanage for nearly forty years, all 
 
15 
 
 go to show that the work of benevolence has not been alto- 
 gether neglected. 
 
 From a small body, the Ministerium of Pennsylvania has 
 grown to be one of the largest and most influential bodies of 
 the Lutheran Church in America. It has been a prominent 
 and powerful factor in the development of the Church on this 
 continent. Beginning with Muhlenberg, it has been blessed 
 with an uninterrupted succession of earnest, faithful, consci- 
 entious and pious leaders, whose leadership has enabled the 
 Synod to take a prominent and leading position in the 
 Church's onward movement. One special feature of this 
 year's celebration ought to be devout gratitude to God for 
 the blessings bestowed upon the labors of those men to 
 whom was given the leadership in the affairs of the Church. 
 After an existence of 150 years and after a dozen or more 
 synods have gone out of it, the Ministerium numbers 324 
 ministers, 500 congregations and 123,470 confirmed members. 
 Last year's congregational contributions amounted to the 
 sum of $683,021.97. 
 
 S. E. OCHSENFORD. 
 
THE MOTHER SYNOD. 
 
 Among the sixty Lutheran Synods in North America, 
 one is known by several names. Its full legal title is " The 
 Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of Pennsylvania and Adja- 
 cent States" ; but it is also frequently called the " Synod of 
 Pennsylvania,"* the " old Synod," and the " Mother Synod." 
 
 It will be the writer's aim to point out, as far as it can be 
 done in the space given, how well the Synod deserves the last 
 name. 
 
 Although Prof. A. L. Graebner, of the Missouri Synod, 
 in his very able and valuable History of the Lutheran Church 
 in this country, maintains that Rev. Berkenmeyer and his 
 colleagues founded the first Lutheran Synod in this country 
 in 1735, Dr. Jacobs, in his History, says : "When it is said 
 that Berkenmeyer in 173s; presided over the first Lutheran 
 Synod in America, this must be understood with some quali- 
 fications. No Synod existed such as we understand by the 
 name. The Synods, as we have them, are confederacies of 
 congregations united permanently under a constitution, pre- 
 scribing regular meetings, and a system of oversight and 
 administration under officers. The Synod over which Berken- 
 meyer presided was a conference of the pastors and rep- 
 resentatives of the congregations and their descendants that 
 had been served by Falckner and Kocherthal, which was held 
 once, and that for the purpose of adjusting serious difficulties 
 in the New Jersey field." " If there had been another meet- 
 ing of this kind in Berkenmeyer's time, it would have been 
 the second Synod in America." 
 
 *Althou<4i that state has other Lutheran Synods. 
 
*7 
 
 The meeting called, and the organization effected, in 
 August, 1748, in the city of Philadelphia, Pa.,* and presided 
 over by Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, deservedly continues, 
 therefore, to be regarded as the Mother Synod. Dr. Mann, 
 in his " Life and Times of H. M. Muhlenberg," says : " Mon- 
 day, August 15, the pastors and delegates met in the church 
 to transact synodical business. After singing and prayer, 
 Muhlenberg, who seems to have been recognized as the pre- 
 siding officer without any formal election, addressed the as- 
 sembly concerning the union long desired, now accomplished. 
 He referred to an attempt to form a synod in the Swedish 
 Church which had failed. What they needed, he said, was 
 " unity ; a twisted cord of many threads will not easily break. 
 We need order ; we must take care of our youths ; our 
 church officers have great responsibilities. We are assem- 
 bled to provide for the things entrusted to us ; Providence 
 willing, we shall in this way assemble from year to year. 
 For the present we are making a trial. We pastors here did 
 not come of our own will, but we are called here, and we are 
 accountable to God and our consciences." 
 
 The representatives of the congregations were then called 
 upon to make statements. The second topic was the condi- 
 tion of the parochial schools. The third point was the 
 liturgy. " Herewith the liturgy, already in use, was ratified 
 by Synod." It was not printed ; the pastors copied it each for 
 himself. It was finally resolved to meet yearly, and alter- 
 nately at Philadelphia and Lancaster, the time to be appointed 
 by the pastors. Every congregation was enjoined to send, at 
 its own expense, two elders. At last, expressions of good 
 will were mutually exchanged. . . . The convention was 
 formally closed with singing a verse of a hymn, and pastors 
 and delegates of the Pennsylvania German Lutheran congre- 
 gations signed the minutes. 
 
 This beginning of synodical life we now celebrate, at the 
 end of one hundred and fifty years. Although Dr. Jacobs, 
 
 *When St. Michael's Church was consecrated, and the assembled ministers 
 ordained J. N. Kurtz. 
 
i8 
 
 in his " History," describes a subsequent movement, in 1760, 
 and says: "The movement in 1760 is in all respects more 
 comprehensive and better adapted to the American surround- 
 ings than that of 1748. The former may be regarded as the 
 permanent and the latter only as the temporary foundation of 
 the present Ministerium of Pennsylvania." It is evident from 
 Dr. Mann's annotated edition of the Halle Reports, that the 
 Synod met regularly, from 1748 to 1754. There were no 
 meetings in 1755, 1756, 1757, 1758, and 1759. Even if the 
 foundation laid in 1748 was only the " temporary" one, and 
 " the synodical constitution gradually grew," the foundation 
 of 1748 was substantially the one on which the building 
 rested. 
 
 Speaking of the synodical constitution, Dr. Jacobs says : 
 " The date of it first being committed to writing and formally 
 adopted is not at hand. It was transcribed into the minute- 
 book begun in 1781, after having been in force years before. 
 The features of this first Lutheran synodical constitution in 
 America are most important, as it forms the basis of so many 
 later synodical organizations. The name is " The Evangelical 
 Lutheran Ministerium in North America."* 
 
 " The confessional obligation is : Every minister pro- 
 fesses that he holds the Word of God and our symbolical 
 books in doctrine and life. In complaints brought against 
 ministers, the subject of investigation must refer to : 1. Posi- 
 tive errors opposed to the plain teachings of the Holy Scrip- 
 tures and our symbolical books." As far as the doctrine was 
 concerned, the permanent and the temporary foundations 
 were unquestionably the same. 
 
 Quoting the " History " we read : " At the second meet- 
 ing the first item of business was Pastor Muhlenberg's propo- 
 sition concerning the necessity of the annual election of an 
 overseer of all the united congregations. Not only was this 
 office not recognized by the authorities in Halle, who in all 
 
 *This was afterward changed to " The German Evangelical Lutheran Minis- 
 terium of Pennsylvania and Adjacent States." In 1882 "German" was erased, 
 thus going back to the Muhlenberg Constitution. 
 
19 
 
 their correspondence say not a word concerning it, since it 
 seemed to be an infringement upon the European superintend- 
 ency of the Pennsylvania churches, but from the very full 
 account of the discussions at the meeting of the Synod in 
 1760, the Halle editors of the ' Reports ' have omitted the 
 section referring to this office, where it is stated that by a 
 unanimous vote the Synod affirmed the necessity of such an 
 office." 
 
 Although the Mother Synod was begun in 1748, it re- 
 mained the only synod of the Lutheran Church up to the 
 organization of the Evangelical Lutheran Ministerium of New 
 York, in 1786, or, as Dr. Nicum has recently shown, in 1773. 
 Dr. Jacobs tells us : " When the tercentenary of the Reforma- 
 tion was celebrated in 1817, the Lutheran Church in America 
 had but three synods, Pennsylvania, New York and North 
 Carolina. Some of the district (then called " special ") con- 
 ferences of the Mother Synod, were, however, assuming 
 synodical proportions, and gradually growing into synodical 
 organizations. They printed and distributed their own min- 
 utes, with their own parochial reports, and their own actions 
 concerning the affairs of the congregations in their bounds. 
 
 " The Lancaster Conference presented to the Synod in 
 1804 a plan for traveling missionaries, which was adopted. 
 It had in view the two-fold object of providing pastors for 
 vacant parishes and of gathering the scattered and uncared- 
 for people into congregations. Within a few years much was 
 accomplished. The names of J. G. Butler, John Stauch 
 (Stough), and Paul Henkel are eminent among these devoted 
 missionaries of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania. They 
 covered a great extent of territory, westward far into Ohio, 
 laying the foundations for the numerous Ohio Synods of to- 
 day, southwestward into the Holston region of Tennessee, 
 and southward through Virginia into North Carolina. Nine 
 years later we find the name of the pioneer Lutheran mis- 
 sionary in India from America, ' Father ' Heyer, on the list 
 of these traveling missionaries, and within three years his 
 field extended into the states of Indiana and Kentucky." 
 
20 
 
 Similar missionary operations were carried on by the 
 Mother Synod in subsequent years, and when the General 
 Synod's Board, in 1857, sent Father Heyer, after his return 
 from India, to Minnesota, the Mother Synod assisted in the 
 work. She deserves that name not only because she was 
 the first of synods, but also because she has been a fostering 
 mother, and has sent her sons into many sections, to preach 
 the Gospel and administer the Sacraments. 
 
 It is almost superfluous to remind the reader that it was 
 the Ministerium of Pennsylvania that resolved, in 18 18, that 
 "in its judgment, it would be well if the different Evangel- 
 ical Lutheran Synods in the United States were to stand, in 
 some way or other, in true union with one another," and to 
 direct its officers to correspond with the other two synods, 
 New York and North Carolina, on the subject. It was at its 
 meeting, at Baltimore, 18 19, that the Plan-Entwurf (" A Pro- 
 posed Plan ") was adopted. Four synods were represented 
 at the convention at Hagerstown, 1820, when the constitution 
 of the new General Synod was adopted, and of the eleven 
 clerical and four lay delegates present, eight were from Penn- 
 sylvania and seven from other synods. " At the next meet- 
 ing of the Pennsylvania Synod, in face of a protest from one 
 of the pastoral charges, the constitution of the General Synod 
 was adopted, after a long discussion, by the overwhelming 
 majority of sixty-seven to six." (Jacobs.) 
 
 For reasons frequently published, the Mother Synod 
 deemed it necessary to withdraw from the General Body in 
 1823, and to keep aloof from it until 1853. At the meeting 
 at Reading, in the latter year, when she resolved to resume 
 connection with the General Synod, she earnestly called upon 
 other synods not connected with that body to enter with her. 
 
 In the Providence of God she felt herself called, in 1866, 
 to issue an address, inviting " all Evangelical Synods, minis- 
 ters and congregations in the United States and Canadas, 
 which confess the unaltered Augsburg Confession," " to unite 
 with us in a convention, for the purpose of forming a union 
 of Lutheran Synods." 
 
21 
 
 This led to the celebrated Reading convention, Decem- 
 ber, 1866, and the organization of the General Council, at 
 Fort Wayne, 1867. From that day to the present she has 
 been a most active and influential member of this body. It 
 will be the work of another hand to describe how much she 
 had to do in preparing the Church Book and the German 
 Kirchenbuch, published by that body. 
 
 The writer of this paper has endeavored to show, in the 
 Lutheran Church Review, how much the Synod interested 
 itself in the educational work of the Church, especially the 
 preparation of young men for the ministry, and how a variety 
 of circumstances prevented her from establishing, for many 
 years, such institutions as she at last secured in the Theolo- 
 gical Seminary at Philadelphia, and Muhlenberg College, at 
 Allentown. For many years prior to the establishment of 
 either seminary or college, the prominent pastors of the 
 Mother Synod were the principal instructors of the candidates 
 for the ministry of our Church in this country ; so that, in 
 this respect also, she proved herself a mother. 
 
 Halle, where Muhlenberg was educated, and whence he 
 was sent forth to do missionary work among the German 
 Lutherans of Pennsylvania, was a training school for mission- 
 aries, and prepared the pioneer missionaries of India, Ziegen- 
 balg, Plutscho, and Schwartz. We know that Halle sent 
 other laborers into the American field, and it was to be ex- 
 pected that the missionary zeal that animated the pioneers of 
 our Church in this country, would survive, to some extent at 
 least, among their successors. We have already seen that 
 such was the case, and that the Mother Synod sent forth 
 home missionaries. 
 
 But the time was to come when our Church in this 
 country was to take an active part in the propagation of the 
 Gospel in heathen lands, and the Mother Synod did not fail 
 to take the place that properly belonged to her. 
 
 We gather our facts from Dr. Jacobs' History. The 
 Rev. Charles Frederick Heyer was born in Germany, 1793, 
 came to America in 1807, studied theology under his pas- 
 
22 
 
 tors, Drs. Helmuth and F. D. Schaefifer, in Philadelphia, and 
 at Gottingen was licensed as a candidate, in 1817, by the 
 Mother Synod, and at once began his labors as a home mis- 
 sionary. In 1837 he reported that he had traveled thou- 
 sands of miles, and found places for at least fifty missionaries. 
 In the same year there was organized a " Foreign Missionary 
 Society of the Evangelical German Churches in the United 
 States. The Ministerium of Pennsylvania was represented 
 by delegates, among whom was Rev. Dr. C. W. Schaeffer. 
 Cooperation with the American Board of Commissioners for 
 foreign missions was declared in the constitution to be one 
 of its objects. The mission of Rev. Dr. Rhenius at Palam- 
 cotta, India, received whatever contributions were gathered 
 during the first years." 
 
 In 1 841 Rev. C. F. Heyer was appointed by the Mis- 
 sion Society of the General Synod missionary to India ; but 
 when the arrangement was made that he should go under 
 the general supervision of the American Board of Commis- 
 sioners for Foreign Missions, he declined, and offered his ser- 
 vices to the Missionary Society of the Ministerium of Penn- 
 sylvania in a letter beginning : 
 
 "Baltimore, June 3, 1841. 
 
 " Dear Brother — I should prefer going into the heathen 
 world under the direction of an Evangelical Lutheran Mis- 
 sionary Society, rather than be dependent upon other Chris- 
 tian denominations ; therefore, I take the liberty of addressing 
 myself to your missionary society. Should the brethren be 
 disposed to send me as a missionary among the heathens, 
 then the following conditions are to be borne in mind." 
 
 Although the committee to which this letter was referred 
 reported regretfully, " we have not sufficient means at hand 
 to form and maintain a heathen mission," " Dr. C. R. Demme 
 was equal to the occasion, and, seconded by Rev. Dr. J. C. 
 Baker (under whose preaching, thirty years before, Heyer 
 had decided to enter the ministry), he silenced all opposition, 
 and raised the Synod to a higher standard by moving the 
 
23 
 
 resolutions, which were unanimously adopted, that began 
 Lutheran Foreign Missions in India." 
 
 " These resolutions of June 7, 1841, were: 
 
 " Resolved, That in reliance on Divine Providence, we commence a heathen 
 mission. 
 
 "Resolved, That we receive Brother Heyer as missionary in our service; how- 
 ever, his offer to invest one thousand dollars of his own property, the interest of 
 which to aid in the support of the mission so long as he is connected with it, be 
 not accepted. 
 
 " Resolved, That the executive committee be solicited immediately to enter 
 into correspondence with Brother Heyer, in order to carry the above resolutions 
 into effect. 
 
 " Resolved, That we recommend to the executive committee, Hindostan as 
 a missionary field, for their consideration. 
 
 " Resolved, That the treasurer, the Rev. Dr. Baker, be requested to address 
 a circular to the different missionary societies of our church, informing them of 
 the above resolutions, and invite them to cooperate with us." 
 
 " Sunday, October 3, 1841, was a notable day in the his- 
 tory of the Lutheran Church, when fourteen or fifteen pastors 
 of the Ministeriums of Pennsylvania and New York, and the 
 Synods of Ohio, Maryland and Virginia, with a large audi- 
 ence, gathered in St. Paul's (German) Church, Philadelphia, 
 and, after listening to a sermon from the new missionary, on 
 Jonah 2:3: ' Arise, go unto Nineveh,' etc., heard the charge 
 addressed him by Rev. Dr. Baker. He sailed from Boston, 
 October 14, in company with some missionaries of the 
 American Board." 
 
 Beyond the fact that the Telugus in India offered a 
 desirable field of labor, and the instructions that he should 
 see if such reports which came from the American Board 
 were correct, he had little to guide him. He had expected 
 to be determined largely by the instructions of Rhenius, of 
 whose death he did not hear until he reached India. In Sep- 
 tember, 1842, he reported that he had located at Guntur, a 
 city two hundred and thirty miles north of Madras and 
 thirty-five miles from the western coast. 
 
 In July, 1844, Rev. Walter Gunn and wife, sent by the 
 Missionary Society of the General Synod, were welcomed by 
 Father Heyer as reinforcements in the work he had begun. 
 Before the close of 1844, seventeen converts had been bap- 
 
24 
 
 tized as the first fruits of the mission. An arrangement was 
 made, during a visit of the pioneer missionary to America, in 
 1846, whereby the General Synod assumed the entire care 
 of the mission, while the Ministerium of Pennsylvania pro- 
 vided for the support of Dr. Heyer. In assuming this work 
 the executive committee of the General Synod's society pay 
 a most graceful tribute to those who had made the beginning : 
 
 " We feel constrained to pay a passing tribute to the 
 Missionary Society of the Pennsylvania Synod for their 
 devoted zeal and activity in the missionary work. To that 
 society we owe the successful establishment of the mission in 
 Guntur. To them belongs the proud distinction of having 
 sent the first Lutheran missionary from the United States. 
 And right and proper was it that the oldest Lutheran Synod 
 in this country, the mother of us all, should take the lead in 
 this noble enterprise. It was in strict unison with the spirit 
 which characterized the founders of that venerable body in 
 leaving their fatherland to establish a branch of our Lutheran 
 Zion in the then wilderness of America. It was providential, 
 whether we consider the man sent, those who sent him, the 
 time, or the section of the country in which he commenced 
 his labors." 
 
 On his return to India in 1849, Dr. Heyer founded 
 another mission center in the Telugu country, in the Palnaud. 
 In 1850 the neighboring Rajahmundry field, with its two mis- 
 sionaries, Groenning and Heise, was transferred to the care of 
 the American Evangelical Lutheran Missionary Society by 
 the North German Society, upon the condition that it was 
 forever to remain a Lutheran mission. In 1857 Dr. Heyer 
 wrote : " The sun of my life is waning, and the shades of 
 evening are rapidly approaching," and left India, as he sup- 
 posed, forever, little anticipating that twelve years later he 
 would return to reorganize a portion of the field that sorely 
 needed his attention. 
 
 Following the same historian, we read: "Dr. Heyer was 
 spending some time in Germany, where he incidentally learned 
 that a portion of the mission field in India was about being 
 
25 
 
 transferred by the committee of the General Synod to the 
 Church missionary society. It was the Rajahmundry and 
 Samulcotta territory, which had been given, in 1850, to the 
 General Synod, under certain conditions, by the North Ger- 
 man Missionary Society, and where Valett, Heise, and Groen- 
 ning had faithfully labored. The same issue was repeated 
 which faced Rhenius when his heroic stand against the require- 
 ments of the Church of England had awakened Heyer's interest 
 before his first trip to India. He lost no time, but immediately 
 took passage for America. He reached this country just in time 
 for the meeting of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania, in Trinity 
 Church, Reading, in June, 1869, where the appearance of the 
 veteran missionary, short in stature, with white locks reach- 
 ing almost to his shoulders, and with his agile movements 
 and rapid speech, at once aroused attention and enkindled 
 enthusiasm. He had brought with him Mr. H. C. Schmidt, a 
 candidate for ordination and the foreign mission field, ready 
 to go forth just as soon as the necessary arrangements could 
 be made. He urged that the Ministerium which had sent him 
 out to begin American Lutheran foreign missions in 1842, in- 
 tervene to arrest the transfer, and, if it were not too late, 
 again assume the responsibility of their support. He would 
 plead with the General Synod's board and with the Church 
 missionary society, and, although nearly seventy-seven years 
 old, would himself go to India and reorganize the work. 
 The question was asked how soon he would be prepared to 
 start on the journey of twelve thousand miles. Raising his 
 valise from the floor by his side, he said, ' I am ready to go 
 now.' His wish was accomplished. Everywhere he swept 
 opposition before him. The mission had been transferred 
 seven months before he reached India, but the Church mis- 
 sionary society could not deny the claims which he urged, 
 and cheerfully relinquished the rights they had acquired. 
 He left New York, August 31, 1869, and reached Guntur, 
 November 24th, having spent a week on his way in the Pal- 
 naud. The astonishment and delight of the older native 
 
26 
 
 Christians at the return of the pioneer missionary repaid him 
 for the fatigue and trials of the way." 
 
 Our space forbids further particulars of his labors there, 
 and of his return. In 1872 he became resident chaplain of 
 the Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, and died there, 
 November 14, 1873, aged eighty years and nine months. 
 
 We have thus given an outline of some of the work in 
 which the venerable Ministerium of Pennsylvania has been 
 engaged during the past one hundred and fifty years, and the 
 record shows that the Mother Synod has no reason to be 
 ashamed of her history. 
 
 G. F. Krotel. 
 East Orange, October, N. J., i8gj. 
 
HISTORY OF THE LITURGICAL DEVELOPMENT 
 OF THE MINISTERIUM OF PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 I. The First Agenda of 1748. 
 
 The history of the liturgical movement in the Ministerium 
 of Pennsylvania is as old as the Mother Synod itself. Even 
 before the first Convention of the Ministerium, in 1748, a form 
 of service had been prepared by Muehlenberg, Brunnholtz, and 
 Handschuh. When Schaum was sent to the Raritan Congre- 
 gations, in the spring of 1747, he was directed to conduct the 
 services in exact accordance with the order which was handed 
 to him in manuscript. One of the most important transactions 
 of the first Synodical meeting in Philadelphia, August 1 5-26, 
 1748, was with reference to this form of service, which was to 
 be adopted and strictly adhered to by all the pastors and con- 
 gregations. All the Elders who were present as delegates of 
 their congregations, testified in behalf of their people that they 
 were well satisfied to use one and the same form of service 
 (einerlei Ceremonien) with the United Pastors. No objection 
 was made to the Agenda, only the fear was expressed that on 
 cold winter days the service might be found too long. But it 
 was left to the Ministerium to make suitable abbreviations 
 (Halle Reports, New Edition, by Drs. Mann and Schmucker, 
 p. 210). At this same convention of the Ministerium, John 
 Nicolas Kurtz was examined, and ordained as pastor of the 
 Tulpehocken charge, and in the " Revers " which 'he signed 
 on August 13, 1748, he solemnly promises to conform his 
 public and private teaching to the Word of God and the Con- 
 fessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, and " to intro- 
 duce no other ceremonies in the services of public worship and 
 
28 
 
 the administration of the sacraments, except those which have 
 been introduced by the Collegio Pastorum of the United Con- 
 gregations, and to use no other Formulary than that pre- 
 scribed for me by them" (Halle Reports, p. 135). And the 
 Tulpehocken Congregation, to which Kurtz was appointed, 
 solemnly promises on its reception " to do, order, decide, or 
 alter nothing in important affairs of the Church, without pre- 
 viously obtaining the counsel and consent of the Rev. Col- 
 legiate Pastors" (Halle Rep., p. 140). 
 
 During the first thirty-eight years of the history of the 
 Ministerium, this Agenda and Liturgy existed only in manu- 
 script. Dr. Schmucker thinks that probably not more than forty 
 copies were ever made. Two of these have been preserved 
 through the care of the late Dr. J. W. Richards, one made 
 by Jacob Van Buskirk, in 1763, the other made by Peter Mueh- 
 lenberg, in 1769. The most important sections are printed 
 in the new edition of the Halle Reports, p. 21 1 to 216,* follow- 
 ing chiefly the copy of Van Buskirk, and supplementing it, 
 wherever necessary, with the text as found in Peter Muehlen- 
 berg's copy. This " Liturgy oder Kirchenbuch," as it is called 
 in Muehlenberg's copy, consists of five chapters : 1. How pub- 
 lic service is to be conducted in our congregations. 2. Of 
 Baptism. 3. Of Proclamation and Marriage. 4. Of the Con- 
 fession and the Lord's Supper. 5. Of Burial. 
 
 The Order of Service, as given in this Agenda, is as fol- 
 lows : Hymn of Invocation of the Holy Spirit, Confession of 
 Sins, Gloria in Excelsis in metrical form, Collect with Saluta- 
 tion and Response, Epistle, Hymn (Hauptlied), Gospel, Creed 
 (in Luther's metrical version), Hymn, Sermon, General Prayer, 
 Proclamations and Announcements, Votum, Hymn, Collection 
 of Alms, Closing Collect with Salutation and Response, Bene- 
 diction, Closing Verse. The Order of the Lord's Supper is as 
 follows : Preface with Salutation, Sursum Corda and Sanctus, 
 Exhortation, Consecration, Invitation, Distribution, Benedica- 
 
 *An English Translation, by the late Dr. C. W. Schaeffer, is found in Dr. H. 
 E. Jacobs' History of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in the United States, p. 
 269 ff. 
 
2 9 
 
 mus, Thanksgiving Collect, Benediction and Closing Collect. 
 Of the character and value of this first Liturgy of the Minis- 
 terium of Pennsylvania, the late Dr. B. M. Schmucker justly 
 says, that " it is beyond comparison the noblest and purest 
 Lutheran Service which the Church in America prepared or 
 possessed until the publication of the Church Book." With 
 only a very few exceptions, such as the omission of the special 
 Introit and the combination of the Confession with the Kyrie, 
 this form is in perfect harmony with the best and purest 
 Agenda of our Lutheran Church in the sixteenth century. 
 The careful investigation made by Dr. Schmucker concerning 
 the origin and history of this Liturgy, has established the fact 
 that it follows closely those Saxon and North German Orders 
 with which Muehlenberg had become familiar in Germany, 
 namely, the Lueneburg Order of 1643, used in his native town, 
 in Eimbeck ; the Calenberg Order of 1569, used at Goettingen, 
 where he studied theology ; the Brandenburg-Magdeburg 
 Order of 1739, used in Halle, when he was a resident of that 
 city ; and the Saxon Order of 17 12, which he used during his 
 pastorate in Gross-Hennersdorf. 
 
 Of special interest to us is the great value which Mueh- 
 lenberg and his co-laborers laid on uniformity in the service of 
 the Lutheran Church in this country. We have seen what a 
 prominent part the Agenda had in the transactions of the first 
 meeting of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania. And when our 
 Patriarch, Henry Melchior Muehlenberg, was nearing the end 
 of his life, he left to the Lutheran Church of this country as 
 his last will and bequest in this matter, the statement : " It would 
 be a most desirable and advantageous thing if all the Evan- 
 gelical Lutheran congregations in the North American States 
 were united with one another, if they all used the same order 
 of service, the same hymn book, and in good and evil days 
 would show an active sympathy and fraternally correspond 
 with one another." (Letter to Dr. Godfr. Enox, of Loonen- 
 burg, November 5, 1783.) 
 
3Q 
 
 II. Agenda and Hymn Book of 1786. 
 
 At the meeting of the Ministerium in 1782 it was resolved 
 to publish the first printed edition of the Agenda. No changes 
 were to be made in the text, but the form of Confirmation was 
 to be added, as found in the Wuerttemberg Agenda of that 
 time. Steps were also taken at the same convention to pub- 
 lish a new hymn book for the United Congregations, in place 
 of the Marburg Hymn Book which was still in general use, 
 and which had been printed for the first time in America by 
 Christoph Sauer, in 1762. Muehlenberg sen., Kunze, Helmuth, 
 and Muehlenberg jun. were appointed a committee for this 
 work, with the following instructions : 1. To follow, as nearly 
 as possible, the arrangement of the Halle Hymn Book (Frey- 
 linghausen). 2. Not to omit any of the old standard hymns, 
 particularly those of Luther and P. Gerhardt. 3. To omit the 
 Gospels and Epistles for Apostles' Days and minor festivals, 
 the history of the destruction of Jerusalem, together with the 
 prayers and the Catechism. 4. The whole work, with any 
 changes that might be proposed, to be submitted to a special 
 meeting of the Ministerium. 5. The book was to contain not 
 more than seven hundred and fifty hymns. Rev. Helmuth 
 was instructed to prepare a collection of prayers for this hymn 
 book, and Dr. Muehlenberg sen. was to write the preface. 
 Another resolution forbids any changes to be made in the 
 Catechism without the approbation of the Synod. Three 
 years afterwards, at the meeting of 1785, Rev. Helmuth was 
 instructed to make some changes and abbreviations in the 
 hymns, and a Committee consisting of Revs. Helmuth, 
 Schmidt and Muehlenberg jun. was appointed to make some 
 changes, also, in the new printed edition of the Agenda. 
 
 The result of these different instructions is before us in 
 the Agenda and Hymn Book of 1786. It is evident that a 
 period of transition has set in between the years 1782 and 
 1786. On the one side we recognize an endeavor to adhere 
 faithfully to the usage and order as it was handed down by 
 the Fathers and the founders of the Ministerium. On the 
 
3i 
 
 other hand there are undeniable evidences of deterioration, not 
 only in- matters of good liturgical taste, but even in points of 
 doctrine. The same emotional subjectivism, which in the 
 Fatherland led first to pietism and next to rationalism, begins 
 to show itself both in the Agenda and in the Hymn Book, 
 though, for the present, the desire still preponderates to hold 
 fast the good inheritance of the Fathers. 
 
 The following are some of the most characteristic points 
 in which the Agenda of 1786 differs from that of 1748. The 
 specific directions to the Pastor to turn his face to the Altar 
 or to the people, are all omitted. Likewise the Gloria in 
 Excelsis, the Collect for the day, the reading of the Gospel at 
 the Altar, and the Creed. Instead of the Collect for the day 
 an ex tempore prayer is prescribed " or a morning-prayer from 
 our hymn book," that is, one of those prayers which Dr. 
 Helmuth had prepared for the appendix of the hymn book. 
 The reading of the Gospel in the pulpit is left optional, '"' the 
 pastor according to his own preference may read the Gospel 
 or his text on which he is going to preach." In the place of 
 the General Prayer another and much more lengthy form is 
 substituted, which covers not less than seven out of the fifty- 
 eight pages of the whole Agenda. A special feature of this 
 edition is also the extensive provision made in rubrical direc- 
 tions and forms for the instruction of Catechumens and the 
 Rite of Confirmation (Unterricht und sogenannte Confirmation 
 der Jugend). Not less than eight pages are devoted to this 
 subject under the three heads: 1, Instruction; 2, Public 
 Examination ; 3, Confirmation itself (Einsegnung). Every- 
 where we discover the influence of the later Pietism in the 
 undue magnifying of the peculiar solemnity of this particular 
 rite, and the effort to make it as emotional as possible. The 
 rubrical directions themselves make it the duty of the Pastor 
 to work upon the feelings of his hearers, to use " the most 
 touching expressions " and the like. Dr. B. M. Schmucker 
 justly condemns the alterations made in the Morning Service 
 of this Agenda in the strongest terms; every one of them, he 
 says, is an injury to the pure Lutheran type of the old service 
 
32 
 
 The chaste liturgical taste of the Fathers has become vitiated ; 
 the accord with the Church of the Reformation is dying out 
 gradually. The Service of the Church is sinking slowly 
 towards the immeasurable depths into which it afterwards fell. 
 
 A few words may be said at this point concerning the 
 character of the Hymn book which accompanied the Agenda 
 of 1786. Dr. H. M. Muehlenberg himself took quite an 
 active part in the compilation of the hymns. In January, 
 1783, he had, according to his diary, selected 534 hymns. 
 " Hymns on the last judgment, intimating its speedy advent 
 and introducing unsuitable signs of its approach, I omitted ; 
 also those which, following the language of Solomon's song, 
 use terms having a taint of the sensual ; also those which 
 speak of Jesus in a playful manner, in diminutive terms, etc., 
 because such language, though intended as childlike and 
 familiar, appears to me childish and not according to Scripture 
 language. Hymns, however, of the oldest and of subsequent 
 times, which are known to all Lutherans from childhood, are 
 not omitted, though, while they are orthodox, their style and 
 rhythm may appear somewhat harsh." " We cannot wonder," 
 says Dr. Mann (Life and Times of Henry Melchior Muehlen- 
 berg), " that the hymns of the earlier period of Pietism also 
 found favor with him. But the sympathy with the song of 
 the preceding period had not outlived itself. Muehlenberg 
 was too conservative a Churchman to deprive Lutherans of 
 hymns to which tradition and habit had attached them, and 
 which strenuously echoed the Lutheran faith. In this respect 
 this hymn book, the largest part of which Muehlenberg com- 
 piled, is much superior to the one edited under Synodical 
 authority in 1849, but does not attain to the merits of the 
 Kirchenbuch, edited by the General Council of the Lutheran 
 Church in America and representing the highest standard of 
 liturgical and hymnological theory." 
 
 But in spite of Dr. Muehlenberg's conservative influence 
 the number of later subjective hymns of the Pietistic School is 
 entirely too large in this book, whilst many of the finest and, 
 at the same time, most popular hymns of the sixteenth and 
 
33 
 
 seventeenth centuries are omitted. Of its 718 hymns only 230 
 are to be found in the Church Book of the General Council. 
 Unnecessary changes were made by Dr. Helmuth in the text 
 even of some of the standard hymns of P. Gerhardt, Johann 
 Heermann, and others. The changes show not only a poor 
 literary and poetical taste, but also an aversion to the strong 
 statements concerning the union of the Divine and Human in 
 the person of Christ, which are so characteristic of the most 
 substantial hymns of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. 
 (See No. 104, 2, where the original " der wahre Gott " is 
 changed ; likewise No. 108, 2, the original " Gott selbst liegt 
 todt" changed into " Mein Herr ist todt") The omission 
 of the Catechism, the Gospels, Epistles and Collects, which 
 had been in the old Marburg Book, from the Pennsylvania 
 Hymn Book of 1786, evidently did not prove satisfactory to 
 the Congregations. This appears from the fact that in 1790 
 already an appendix was printed (Anhang zu dem Gesang- 
 buch der Vereinigten Evangelisch Lutherischen Gemeinden 
 in Nord America, Germantown, Michael Billmeyer), contain- 
 ing those very parts which had been excluded from the 
 Hymn Book of 1786. 
 
 3. Agenda of 18 18. 
 
 A very decided downward step in the liturgical history 
 of the Ministerium is marked by the Liturgy of 18 18. (Lit- 
 urgie oder Kirchen-Agende der Evangelisch Lutherischen 
 Gemeinden in Pennsylvania und den benachbarten Staaten. 
 Schaefer und Maund, Baltimore, 18 18.) There is hardly a 
 trace left in this Liturgy of a responsive service. It opens 
 with a confession of sin, in the pure style of the sixteenth 
 century, but without absolution. In its place may be substi- 
 tuted a prayer ending with a Kyrie. This is followed by the 
 Salutation, the reading of the Gospel, Epistle, or any other 
 suitable selection from the Scriptures, Hymn, Sermon, Gen- 
 eral Prayer and Votum, Closing Verse and Benediction. A 
 second form of the Morning Service opens with a selection 
 of Sentences, among them the Versicles of the Matin and 
 
34 
 
 Vesper, and part of the Venite Exultemus. Then follows a 
 hymn, after which the pastor is directed to read at the Altar 
 a modern version of the Te Deum. This is followed by a 
 Hymn, Prayer in the pulpit, Sermon, Prayer, Hymn, Benedic- 
 tion. For Infant Baptism not less than three different forms 
 are offered. The first of these is in the main unobjectionable, 
 and is found in the Pennsylvania Agenda to the present day. 
 But the first question to the Sponsors, " Do you renounce the 
 Devil and all his works and all his ways ?" is supplemented 
 by the significant addition, " that is, the dominion of sin and 
 vanity." The second and third formulas are altogether mod 
 ern and in the very worst taste. The renunciation of Satan and 
 the confession of faith in the Triune God are entirely omitted. 
 In their place we have a simple declaration on the part of the 
 Sponsors of their willingness that the child should be baptized 
 and received into the number of Christians, and a promise that 
 they would give their counsel and assistance that it should be 
 instructed in the doctrines of Christianity and trained up in 
 everything that is right and good (" zu allem Guten erzogen 
 werden"). There are also three different forms given for the 
 administration of the Lord's Supper. Every one of them is a 
 complete deviation from the ancient chaste forms of the six- 
 teenth century. In the distribution of the elements that most 
 un-Lutheran form is used, " Jesus says, take, eat," etc. In- 
 stead of this the following passages are also recommended to 
 be said in the distribution : John 6: 51, 54, 55; I Cor. 10: 16; 
 11 : 26; Rev. 19: 9. In the Ordination Service there is no 
 reference whatever to the Confession of the Evangelical 
 Lutheran Church, the candidates being consecrated with the 
 following words : " In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, in- 
 voking His Spirit, to the honor of the Father, we ordain, con- 
 secrate and appoint you to the ministry of reconciliation, for 
 the preaching of the Kingdom of God, to be stewards of His 
 mysteries." 
 
 A fitting companion to this Agenda of 18 18 was the 
 hymn book published in 1817 by F. G. Schaeffer, in Balti- 
 more, with the title "Das Gemeinschaftliche Gesangbuch, 
 
35 
 
 zum gottsdienstlichen Gebrauch der Lutherischen und Re- 
 formirten Gemeinden in Nord-Amerika. Auf Verlangen der 
 meisten Prediger beider Benennungen gesammelt und von den 
 Committeen zweier Ministerien geprueft und genehmigt." The 
 preface of the first edition openly announced it as the aim of 
 this book " to break down the partition wall between Luther- 
 ans and Reformed, which is only based on prejudices ; to cul- 
 tivate the true spirit of the Christian religion, the spirit of tol- 
 erance and fraternal love ; and to unite more closely Chris- 
 tians and Christians." This book was formally recommended 
 as a decided improvement on the old Pennsylvania hymn 
 book by the Synods of Pennsylvania, New York and North 
 Carolina ; and the second edition parades these recommenda- 
 tions, which were of course highly gratifying to the publishers. 
 " We are delighted to be able to say that these hymns are ad- 
 mirably selected," says the report of the Pennsylvania com- 
 mittee, signed by F. W. Geissenhainer, J. Georg Schmucker, 
 Christian Endress, Johann Knoske and Johann P. Hecht. 
 The Secretary of the New York Ministerium, August Wack- 
 erhagen, records the resolution " That Mr. F. G. Schaeffer be 
 encouraged to publish this book, and that the Ministerium 
 will exert itself to introduce it in those congregations that 
 conduct their service in the German language." Dr. Daniel 
 Kurtz, of Baltimore, and Dr. F. D. Schaeffer, of Philadelphia, 
 give it their unqualified recommendation. Dr. Becker records 
 his gratitude to the publishers for this "admirable work which 
 recommends itself," especially in view of the fact that " the 
 present hymn books are utterly unfit for use in the Union 
 Churches of our Country." The Rev. Gottlieb Schober, Sec- 
 retary of the North Carolina Synod, furnishes the action of 
 his Synod, recommending this work "inasmuch as it tends to 
 establish the beautiful accord between the Lutheran and Re- 
 formed hymns." No man, however, was better pleased with 
 this production than Dr. Frederick H. Quitman, the President 
 of the New York Synod. He endorses it as a book " better 
 adapted to our present times than those now used in the Ger- 
 man Protestant Churches of our country." 
 
36 
 
 We have undertaken the rather unprofitable work of a 
 patient and careful examination of this whole compilation of 
 four hundred and ninety-four hymns, and we are free to say 
 that we have no words to express our utter disgust with the 
 character and spirit of this work. We would not think it 
 worth while to enter into detail, if it were not a most deplor- 
 able fact that much of the spirit of this book has been perpet- 
 uated unto the present day, not only by the private enterprises 
 of unscrupulous publishing firms, but also in the hymn book 
 of the Pennsylvania Synod of 1849. The preface of the first 
 edition of the Gemeinschaftliche Gesangbuch pretends that the 
 publishers were much better equipped for the production of a 
 satisfactory hymn book than the venerable Fathers that com- 
 piled the first Pennsylvania hymn book, " who had not the 
 necessary aids for such a work." It is said that the names of 
 the authors, wherever known, are given at the head of the 
 hymns. Our examination shows that almost one-half of all 
 the hymns are given anonymously. Among them are hymns 
 of P. Gerhardt and other well known authors. Again we find 
 that hymns of Gerhardt are ascribed to other writers, thus 
 betraying the ignorance of the compilers on points which might 
 be expected to be well known to men who engage in such a 
 work. Of the rich treasures of German hymnology in the six- 
 teenth century only about half a dozen numbers are given, 
 and these, with one exception, changed almost beyond recog- 
 nition. The seventeenth century is represented by about forty 
 hymns. The rest of the book, nearly four hundred and fifty 
 hymns, belongs to the eighteenth century, the period of con- 
 stantly increasing decay in German hymnology. Gellert leads 
 among the authors with forty hymns ; next comes J. A. Cramer 
 (1723-1788), who wrote in the style of Klopstock and Gellert, 
 with sixteen hymns ; then follows J. Dietrich, that arch enemy 
 and destroyer of sound churchly hymns, with fifteen hymns ; 
 J. J. Rambach, with fourteen ; Paul Gerhardt, with eleven ; 
 C. C. Sturm, whose soundness in the faith was justly ques- 
 tioned by Senior Goetze in Hamburg, with ten ; Benjamin 
 Schmolk, with ten ; Johann Heermann, with eight. 
 
37 
 
 But by far the worst feature is the frivolous and scandal- 
 ous treatment of the finest jewels of our Church Song in this 
 book. " Allein Gott in der Hoeh sei Ehr," the German Gloria 
 in Excelsis, by Nicol. von Hofe, is ascribed to Selnecker, and 
 its text completely changed. Not one of P. Gerhardt's most 
 popular hymns has escaped the vandalism of these destroyers. 
 In place of the classical " O Haupt voll Blut und Wunden," 
 the congregation is directed to sing " Der du voll Blut und 
 Wunden fuer uns am Kreuze starbst, und unsern letzten Stun- 
 den den groessten Trost erwarbst." And in Johann Heer- 
 mann's Passion hymn, " Herzliebster Jesu," the people must 
 no longer sing " Was hast Du verbrochen ?" That antiquated 
 question is answered by this advanced and progressive hymn 
 book ; it now reads : " Du hast nichts verbrochen." Indeed, 
 difficile est satiram non scribere ! It is as if a set of school 
 boys had tried its very worst to tinker with every line, "just 
 for the fun of it." Of course there is no proper place for Dr. 
 Martin Luther in a hymn book of this kind. Still there is a 
 certain fitness in the choice of the one hymn of his that has 
 been admitted into this collection : "Aus tiefer Noth ruf ich 
 zu Dir." No doubt if the Father of German Church Song 
 could have risen from his grave and looked over this slaughter 
 field of all that was great and pure and noble in our hymns, 
 he would have intoned a " De Profundis " from the very depth 
 of his heart. 
 
 Compared with this " Gemeinschaftliche Gesangbuch," 
 the little hymn book published sixteen years afterwards by 
 order of the General Synod through a Committee consisting 
 of Dr. J. G. Schmucker, F. Heyer, A. Lochmann, A. M., is a 
 vast improvement. This " Evangelische Liedersammlung 
 genommen aus der Liedersammlung und dem Gemeinschaft- 
 lichen Gesangbuch zum bequemeren Gebrauch in den Evan- 
 gelischen Gemeinden, Gettysburg, 1834," contains four hun- 
 dred and fifteen hymns. Some of the best hymns of the old 
 Pennsylvania hymn book are restored, and P. Gerhardt's 
 hymns, though needlessly abbreviated, are mostly given in a 
 pure text, with little variation from the original. 
 
33 
 
 Liturgical Development from 1839 to i860. 
 
 A new era in the Liturgical development of the Minis- 
 terium of Pennsylvania begins with the year 1839. The true 
 character and importance of this period in the Liturgical his- 
 tory of the Synod can only be understood and appreciated 
 when we consider at the same time the Liturgical work done 
 by other Lutheran bodies with which the Ministerium of Penn- 
 sylvania stood in close relations, though not in organic con- 
 nection, particularly the New York Ministerium and the Gen- 
 eral Synod. As far as the New York Ministerium is con- 
 cerned, the relation of the Liturgical work of the Pennsylvania 
 Synod may, in the main, be characterized as one of reciprocity 
 and of friendly harmonious cooperation. On the part of the 
 General Synod there is an unmistakable tendency, even during 
 the period when the Mother Synod kept aloof from organic 
 connection with this body, to have an understanding with the 
 Pennsylvania Synod on Liturgical matters, to use and recom- 
 mend its Liturgical work, whilst all the independent efforts of 
 the General Synod in this line ended in signal failure. The 
 reconstruction of a pure Liturgical Service, during that period 
 of its history, was evidently not one of the charismata of the 
 General Synod. The deeply rooted antagonism of some of 
 its most prominent and influential members against the true 
 spirit of the Church of the Augsburg Confession, no doubt, 
 had much to do with this state of affairs. 
 
 In 1835 the Ministerium of Pennsylvania endorsed and 
 introduced the New York Synod's Liturgy of 1834, which 
 was really not much above the Pennsylvania Agenda of 18 18 
 as the new Liturgy for its English congregations. At the 
 same time it also requested the General Synod to do likewise 
 for the sake of uniformity, and consequently, in 1837, the 
 General Synod directed its Book Committee to append the 
 New York Synod's English Liturgy to the General Synod's 
 hymn book, provided that they approved of the last edition 
 of that Liturgy. 
 
39 
 
 At the meeting of the Pennsylvania Synod, in 1839, Dr. 
 Demme, Dr. Baker, J. P. Hecht, Dr. J. Miller and J. P. Schin- 
 del, were appointed a committee " to prepare a new edition of 
 our Church Liturgy, in an improved and more complete 
 form." The Secretary was directed to give notice of this 
 action to all the other Synods of the Church who used this 
 Liturgy, and to invite them fraternally to cooperate in this 
 work. Hereupon the Synod of New York appointed Dr. P. 
 F. Meyer, Professor H. I. Schmidt and C. F. E. Stohlmann, 
 and the Synod of Ohio, Professor W. Schmidt, J. Wagenhals 
 and J. J. Fast, to cooperate with the committee of the Synod 
 of Pennsylvania. The work of these joint committees having 
 been approved by the Ministerium of Pennsylvania, in Har- 
 risburg, in 1841, with a few changes, was published in 1842, 
 and the preface is signed by the members of the respective 
 committees. The General Synod in 1843 recommended this 
 Liturgy " as suitable for adoption among our German 
 Churches generally." At the same time a committee was ap- 
 pointed " to prepare a Liturgy in the English language, hav- 
 ing reference to the German Liturgy of the Synod of Penn- 
 sylvania as the basis of the same, as well as other liturgical 
 forms now in use in the Church." This committee reported, in 
 1845, that it had agreed to translate the Liturgy of the 
 Synod of Pennsylvania, and to enlarge or diminish the same 
 as it might appear best to the translators. The committee 
 claims the following advantages for this Liturgy: " 1. It is 
 more complete than the other English Liturgies. 2. It is, in 
 the strictest sense, the Liturgy of the American Lutheran 
 Church, inasmuch as it sprang from that portion of the 
 Church which is the mother of us all, and which is still held 
 in the highest reverence by the oldest congregations of our 
 denomination. 3. If uniformity be desired, it will be reached 
 by the adoption of these forms. Whether we attend German 
 or English service, we hear the pastor, as he stands before 
 the altar, utter the same truths, address us in the same man- 
 ner, and pour out the same prayer before the Hearer of 
 prayer. 4. No other Liturgy can have the same historical 
 
40 
 
 associations. 5. As a large portion of the Church, namely, 
 the Synods of Pennsylvania, New York, and Ohio, as well as 
 the General Synod, have already adopted the German Liturgy, 
 it appears to be evidently necessary, or at least highly desir- 
 able, that not merely a work resembling this, but rather, if it 
 is possible, the very same work should be published in the 
 English language." This report is signed by Charles Philip 
 Krauth, B. Kurtz, W. M. Reynolds, Ezra Keller, J. G. Morris, 
 C. A. Smith. The work of this committee appeared in 1847, 
 and its preface contains many excellent suggestions in refer- 
 ence to the use and desirableness of a liturgy, and uniformity 
 in worship. In 1848, the Pennsylvania Synod appointed a 
 committee to examine this English Liturgy. It reported in 
 the following year " that the translation as a whole is a suc- 
 cessful one, but that in a few passages the doctrinal statements 
 are not expressed as definitely as in the original, but neverthe- 
 less in general accordance with other formulas which we have 
 elsewhere, on the same subjects. The translation is, for the 
 present, recommended for the use of our congregations, in 
 the hope that the General Synod will make provision for a 
 perfectly faithful translation in a second edition. It was also 
 resolved, " That we rejoice that our brethren of the General 
 Synod have translated our Liturgy into the English language, 
 thus rendering it accessible to the English-speaking portion 
 of our household of faith, and that we hope that this may be 
 the means of promoting greater harmony, and of strengthen- 
 ing the fraternal relations between us and them, and the entire 
 Church." 
 
 An impartial examination of the Pennsylvania Agenda of 
 1842, however, shows that, after all, there is very little prog- 
 ress made in it beyond the form of 1818 which has been de- 
 scribed above. It is no responsive liturgy at all. The fol- 
 lowing order is prescribed for the regular Sunday morning 
 service : The pastor opens with a votum or another inspiring 
 ("erhebend") Scripture passage and announces a hymn. 
 After the singing of the hymn he goes to the altar and ex- 
 horts the congregation to make confession of sins, or he 
 
41 
 
 reads one of the General Prayers. This is followed by the 
 reading of Scriptures, the Gospel, Epistle, or another suitable 
 passage. Then the principal hymn (Hauptlied) is announced, 
 and the minister ascends the pulpit, prays, preaches, and 
 prays again. After a closing hymn the congregation is dis- 
 missed with the benediction. In accordance with these di- 
 rections the Agenda furnishes the following liturgical mate- 
 rial for such a service. A number of opening sentences and 
 passages, three different forms of confession, without any 
 provision for the active participation on the part of the con- 
 gregation, a number of General Prayers in very poor liturgical 
 taste, one of them interwoven with the words of a well known, 
 sentimental Moravian hymn, another a modern paraphrase 
 of the Creed, together with reminiscences from the German 
 Gloria and other familiar hymns. The material furnished for 
 the festival seasons of the Church Year is particularly objec- 
 tionable. There is not a trace of the chaste and dignified lan- 
 guage of the ancient Church, but plenty of oratorical pathos 
 and bombastic phrases after the manner of Klopstock, 
 Lavater and their cotemporaries. 
 
 In the forms for infant baptism we find the Agenda of 
 1842 even more unsatisfactory than that of 181 8. It repeats 
 all the three forms given in the Agenda of 1818, but changes 
 the opening words of the first form. " Inasmuch as all men 
 are conceived and born in sin " into this modern statement : 
 " Inasmuch as all men are by nature poor and helpless, 
 estranged from the life of God and under the power of death." 
 A fourth form for infant baptism is even added which directs 
 the minister in the act of baptism itself to address the infant 
 in the following language : " Let thyself then be led to Jesus ! 
 Receive the consecration of Christianity and, in memory of 
 this hour, thy Christian name N. N. (So lass dich zu Jesus 
 fuehren ! Empfange die Weihe des Christentums und zum 
 Gedaechtniss dieser Stunde deinen Christennamen N. N.) 
 We welcome thee into the covenant of love ! " For the cele- 
 bration of the Lord's Supper the same three formulas are 
 given as in the Agenda of 1818, with all their objectionable 
 
42 
 
 features, including^the general invitation (in the second form) : 
 " In the name of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Master, I say to 
 all who acknowledge Him as their Saviour and are deter- 
 mined to follow Him faithfully, ye are welcome at this feast 
 of love ! " A real improvement on the Agenda of 1 8 1 8 is the 
 addition of a form of installation of a pastor, in which for the 
 first time, after a long pause, direct reference is again made to 
 the Confession of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, as 
 founded upon the Word of God. 
 
 The Hymn Book of 1849. 
 
 During the interval between the publication of this 
 Agenda of 1842 and the revised edition of 1855, which marks 
 a decided progress in the Liturgical development of the Min- 
 isterium, a new hymn book was published by the Synod of 
 Pennsylvania in 1849. At the meeting held in Philadelphia, 
 in 1847, a committee, consisting of Revs. J. Miller, D. Ulrich, 
 F. W. Geissenhainer, C. F. E. Stohlmann and C. R. Demme, 
 recommended the publication of a new hymn book. Among 
 the reasons urged in favor of such action the following 
 points are mentioned : " The old hymn book of the Minis- 
 terium is used only by a few congregations, while other books 
 that are in actual use have not the sanction of the Church. 
 If the Synod should not make provision for a new book, it is to 
 be feared that a number of congregations will introduce hymn 
 books of their own choice. In the preparation of this new book 
 it is recommended that as many hymns as possible be retained 
 from the old Pennsylvania hymn book, and these with as few 
 alterations as possible. The friendly cooperation of other 
 Synods should also be solicited for this work, but if it could 
 not be obtained, the Ministerium should not, on this account, 
 give up the work. In accordance with these recommenda- 
 tions the publication of a new book was resolved, and a com- 
 mittee, consisting of Dr. Demme, Dr. J. Miller, Dr. Becker, G. 
 A. Reichert and D. Ulrich, was entrusted with the work. 
 The Synods of New York and of West Pennsylvania con- 
 sented to participate in the preparation and introduction of 
 
43 
 
 the new book, the former through Dr. Stohlmann, the latter 
 through Dr. S. S. Schmucker, J. Albert and A. G. Deininger. 
 This hymn book, popularly known as the " Wollenweber 
 Book," appeared in 1849. It will hardly be denied by the 
 Church Historian that the time chosen for the preparation of 
 this book was not exactly favorable for such an important 
 work. It was a period of transition. A more churchly and 
 confessional spirit just began to make itself felt. But the re- 
 vival of a true Lutheran consciousness was as yet in its first 
 weak beginnings. Much of the old leaven still remained. 
 Even the Agenda of 1855, six years after the appearance of 
 the hymn book, retained, in its second form of the Commu- 
 nion Service, that obnoxious form of distribution in the Lord's 
 Supper : " Jesus says, take," etc. It is not to be wondered, 
 therefore, that in the preparation of the hymn book the un- 
 satisfactory character of this transition period should be mani- 
 fested ; on the one side an effort to improve on former hymn 
 books in the spirit of a sound historical Lutheranism, on the 
 other hand a constant yielding to the modern spirit which had 
 been ruling in the liturgical and hymnological literature of the 
 Church for the past fifty years. The result could not be sat- 
 isfactory. In spite of the high appreciation which the com- 
 pilers of this new book show for the old Pennsylvania hymn 
 book of 1786, they have not even come up to its mark, as 
 Dr. Mann truly says in his Life of Muhlenberg (p. 500, the 
 old book is " much superior to the one edited under Synodical 
 authority in 1849 ")• 
 
 The hymn book of 1849 contains 710 hymns. Out of 
 this number only thirty-nine belong to the first period of Ger- 
 man Church Song, down to the end of the sixteenth century. 
 Three hundred and fifty belong to the second period, from 
 the beginning of the seventeenth to the middle of the eigh- 
 teenth century, and the remaining three hundred and twenty — 
 that is, nearly one-half of all the hymns — belong to the period 
 of decay which abolished or reconstructed the ancient hymns 
 and Liturgies of the Lutheran Church, and substituted in 
 their place shallow, modern productions of bombastic, un- 
 
44 
 
 churchly and unscriptural phraseology. The festival sea- 
 sons of the Church Year are very poorly supplied in this 
 book. The finest hymns of our Church are missed under these 
 rubrics. The text of the hymns is much nearer to the origi- 
 nal than that of the " Gemeinschaftliche Gesangbuch," espe- 
 cially those of P. Gerhardt are in the main correctly edited. 
 But, after all, this book also is under the sway of that " Hymn 
 Book Revolution," which Koch describes in his history of 
 Church Song " when the most reverend Consistorial Counsel- 
 lors, Court Preachers and General Superintendents played the 
 role of Revolutionaries and committed a three-fold robbery 
 against the Christian people of Germany, stealing what was 
 their sacred property as a Nation, as a Church, and as lovers 
 of true poetry." What we said before of certain alterations 
 made by Dr. Helmuth in the hymn book of 1786, involving 
 a yielding of the strong Christological position of our Lutheran 
 Church, is true also of changes made in the hymn book of 
 1849. 
 
 The Revised Agenda of 1855. 
 
 The Agenda of 1842, which we had found to be, in the 
 main, of the same character as that of 18 18, in a short time 
 proved to be unsatisfactory to the Ministerium. The con- 
 stant growth of a churchly and Lutheran consciousness de- 
 manded something different from what had been offered in 
 1818 and 1842. Consequently in 1850 it was resolved that 
 a new edition of the Liturgy for the Evangelical Lutheran 
 Churches in Pennsylvania, New York and Ohio be published ; 
 that we consult with those Synods that participated in the 
 publication of the last edition ; that a committee be appointed 
 to inform them of our intention, and request them to lend us 
 their assistance. The committee consisted of Drs. Demme, 
 Baker, and Revs. Reichert, C. Miller and C. W. Schaeffer. 
 In the following year this committee was instructed to cooper- 
 ate in this matter also with a committee of the General Synod. 
 The New York Ministerium had again appointed Dr. Stohl- 
 mann and Dr. H. J. Schmidt to represent it in this work. In 
 1853, the Ministerium of Pennsylvania, after hearing the re- 
 
45 
 
 port of its committee, resolved " that the publication of the 
 Liturgy be deferred until the District Synod of Ohio shall 
 have held their joint meeting, and that our delegate to that 
 body be instructed to inform them of the same." A special 
 committee was also appointed to prepare a number of prayers 
 for the use of families and individuals, to be appended to our 
 Liturgy. Drs. Mann, C. W. Schaeffer and Rev. Peixoto con- 
 stituted this committee. The delegates to the General Synod 
 which the Ministerium of Pennsylvania had resolved to join 
 again at this very convention were instructed to report to the 
 General Synod the action of the Pennsylvania Synod in regard 
 to the Liturgy, and to request that body to grant permission 
 to their Liturgy Committee to hold a joint meeting with sim- 
 ilar committees from this and other Synods, and authorize 
 them to assume the translation into the English language of 
 the same, as soon as all the necessary preliminary arrange- 
 ments shall have been concluded. In response to this action 
 of the Pennsylvania Synod the General Synod instructed its 
 Liturgical Committee that they " examine the Liturgy which 
 is being prepared by the Pennsylvania and other Synods, with 
 the view of reporting to the next General Synod such alter- 
 ations in our present Liturgy as they may deem advisable." 
 
 In 1854 the final report of the Liturgical Committee on 
 the new edition of the Agenda was laid before the Ministerium 
 of Pennsylvania. Dr. Demme, who had taken the principal 
 part in this work, asked to be discharged from the committee. 
 But the Ministerium declined to do this, and in turn requested 
 him to continue on this committee, excusing him, however, 
 from any active part in the work of publication itself. "We 
 have," says an eye-witness* of these discussions, " a vivid 
 recollection of these Synodical sessions, and of the manner in 
 which Dr. Demme read specimens of the new Liturgy, ex- 
 plained proposed alterations, and obtained the opinion of 
 Synod. He had devoted much time and study to the Liturgy, 
 
 *Dr. G. F. Krotel, in a series of seven m^st valuable' artic'es on "The Gen- 
 eral Synod and the Liturgy," in the Lutheran and Missionary, February and 
 March, 1864. 
 
4 6 
 
 but was unwilling to put anything into it without the intelli- 
 gent assent of the brethren. We remember how he presented 
 the whole subject of responses, how the matter was discussed, 
 and how the Synod decided that this feature of the earliest 
 Liturgies of our Church in this country and of the great mod- 
 ern Liturgies of our Church in Europe should go into the new 
 Liturgy." 
 
 The committee, fearing that some of the most important 
 features of this new Agenda might be considered by some as 
 innovations, took pains to explain and defend its position in 
 the preface. It had been found necessary to emphasize the 
 Lutheran Confession more decidedly than hitherto, " because 
 certain things had been, and were still being, declared to be 
 Lutheran which, according to the letter and the spirit of her 
 Confession, were utterly foreign to the Lutheran Church. No 
 one who is at all familiar with the usage of the ancient Church 
 and also the earlier traditions of the Lutheran Church will call 
 it an innovation, that certain ancient parts of the service 
 have been restored, and that it has been made responsive. 
 Such active participation of the congregation in the public 
 services was the established order in Lutheran congregations 
 of this country during the last and even in this present cen- 
 tury. If we succeed in restoring this right to the congrega- 
 tions so that they become accustomed to exercise it regularly, 
 we will have contributed essentially towards a true revival of 
 well ordered services in the house of God, and in doing so we 
 have acted in the spirit of the Fathers of our Church who 
 never approved of keeping the congregation in silence." 
 
 And certainly the responsive character of the service in 
 this new Agenda is its most commendable feature. We find 
 it introduced in the opening Versicles, the Kyrie, the Amen 
 after the Absolution, the Gloria in Excelsis, the Amen after 
 the Collect, the Responses after the reading of the Gospel and 
 Epistle, and in the Amen after the Benediction. The ancient 
 responses in the Communion Service are restored in the Pre- 
 face, the Sanctus, Agnus Dei, Nunc Dimittis, Versicle and 
 closing Collect, and Benedicamus. Our enumeration of all 
 
47 
 
 these parts of the service, as found in the new Agenda, shows 
 another feature of excellence in this Liturgy; namely, the 
 restoration of almost all the main parts of the ancient service, 
 mostly in their correct order. In the Forms for Ordination 
 and Installation and for the Laying of Cornerstones there is a 
 clear and distinct reference to the Lutheran Confession. The 
 text of the Augsburg Confession itself is incorporated in the 
 Agenda between the first and second part of the book. 
 
 On the other hand, there are also some points which are 
 still unsatisfactory and even highly objectionable in this 
 Agenda of 1855. There is confusion right in the opening 
 section of the Morning Service, resulting from the combina- 
 tion of the Confiteor and the Kyrie,and the use of the Saluta- 
 tion and the Sursum Corda at this point. The Introit (Ein- 
 gangsspruch) is placed after the Gloria in Excelsis, and to be 
 read by the minister before the Collect. These so called In- 
 troits and the Collects following them have, as a rule, very 
 little ancient authority, but are chiefly taken from Bunsen's 
 'Allgemeines Gesang und Gebetbuch, 1846." The Lord's 
 Prayer follows the Collect. The reading of the Epistle is left 
 optional, and it is placed after the Gospel. The Creed is not 
 made obligatory, and its reading is assigned to the minister. 
 The sermon is to be followed by an extempore Prayer, or a 
 General Bidding Prayer, to be offered in the pulpit or at the 
 altar. A great deal of the unsound and unliturgical leaven is 
 retained in the parallel forms which stand in the book with 
 equal authority side by side with those purer forms to which 
 attention has been directed. Thus there are three different 
 forms of Confession carried over from the Agendas of 1818 
 and 1842, all without responses on the part of the congrega- 
 tion. All the oratory and bombast of the General and Festival 
 Prayers of the Agenda of 1842 is retained in this new edition. 
 The same is the case with the second formula of the Com- 
 munion Service with its objectionable and unionistic form of 
 distribution. For Baptism, also, there is a second form re- 
 tained from the Liturgy of 1842, and unfortunately it is that 
 
4 8 
 
 very sentimental and oratorical one which we have exposed 
 in describing the Agenda of 1842. 
 
 The English Liturgy of i860. 
 
 . When the Ministerium of Pennsylvania was ready to pub- 
 lish the revised Agenda of 1855, a committee was appointed 
 with the instruction " to adopt measures to have the Liturgy 
 translated into English." This committee consisted of Dr. C- 
 F. Schaeffer, C. W. Schaeffer, C. F. Welden, G. F. Krotel and 
 B. M. Schmucker, men of sound churchly conservatism, high 
 literary culture and excellent liturgical taste. Some of them 
 had for years made a specialty of the study of the standard 
 Agenda of our Lutheran Church, as well as of the Liturgies 
 of the Prereformation period. And to the present day the 
 Church is indebted to these brethren for having given a new 
 impulse to the liturgical development of the Mother Synod, 
 for laying down the correct principles for the construction of 
 a churchly service, and for throwing out all that was in con- 
 flict with those principles. There was one redeeming feature 
 in most of those objectionable parts with which the German 
 Agenda of 1855 was still burdened; their very language for- 
 bade the attempt of reproducing them in pure, readable, 
 churchly English. At the very outset of their work, therefore, 
 the committee very wisely asked for permission to " decide 
 which portion of the service was to be first translated," and 
 proposed that for the present they should only furnish in the 
 English language the several orders of divine service for Sun- 
 days and Festivals, with the Collects and General Prayers, 
 one prayer for each festival, the meditations on the Passion of 
 of our Lord, and one form for each ministerial act. In 1858 
 B. M. Schmucker, in behalf of the committee, read the form 
 of the Morning Service. The Synod expressed its satisfaction 
 therewith, and commended the industry and circumspection 
 of the committee. In the following year various changes and 
 improvements recommended by the committee were approved, 
 and the publication of the English Morning Service in a cheap 
 form for general distribution was ordered. In 1 860 additional 
 
49 
 
 changes proposed by the committee were approved, and 
 authority was given to have one thousand copies printed on 
 moveable letters. A copy was to be presented to the General 
 Synod with the request that it should recommend it to its 
 congregations. The book appeared in this provisional form 
 under the title "A Liturgy for the use of the Evangelical 
 Lutheran Church, by authority of the Ministerium of Penn- 
 sylvania. Philadelphia, Lindsay and Blakiston, i860." 
 
 From the preface we give the following extracts, which 
 indicate the distinctive character of the book as over against 
 the German Agenda of 1855, on which it was nominally based. 
 " Much of the matter contained in the German Liturgy the 
 translators have been instructed to omit as superfluous. In 
 that portion of the work of which a translation is here pre- 
 sented, the translators have been instructed to make a number 
 of alterations, chiefly for the purpose of securing a stricter 
 conformity to the general usage of the ancient and purest Litur- 
 gies of the Lutheran Church, but in a few instances for the pur- 
 pose of conforming to the practice of our English Churches 
 in this country." A selection of Introits is given, taken chiefly 
 from the Bavaria Agenda. The Nicene Creed is added " for 
 occasional use." The recommendation is made that the Gen- 
 eral Prayer should be placed, where by the common consent 
 of almost all Lutheran Liturgies it belongs, after the sermon. 
 "The work here presented for the use of our English Churches 
 within the Synod of Pennsylvania, and any others which may 
 see fit to adopt it, will be found to agree more nearly with the 
 ancient usage of the Lutheran Church than any which has 
 yet been published in the English language by any portion of 
 our Church in this country. Notwithstanding various minor 
 differences between the older Liturgies of the Lutheran Church 
 in the several countries of Europe, there is a substantial agree- 
 ment in the prominent outlines of the Divine Service. And 
 the order of Divine Service contained in this work agrees with 
 them in all things essential, except in position of the General 
 Prayer." After this follows a translation and adaptation of 
 that beautiful sketch of the full service of the Lutheran Church 
 
50 
 
 which is found in the preface of Loehe's Agenda. Here, in- 
 deed, breathes a spirit very different from what our Churches 
 had been accustomed to in their formulas during the preced- 
 ing fifty years. They had " einen andern Geist." 
 
 In 1862 the work of Liturgical reconstruction was ex- 
 tended to the field of hymnology also. A committee, includ- 
 ing the members of the Liturgy Committee, was appointed to 
 examine the English hymn books now in use in our Church 
 and to report on the desirability of either revising one of the 
 existing books or of preparing a new one. Dr. C. W. Schaeffer, 
 G. F. Krotel, B. M. Schmucker, A. T. Geissenhainer, F. W. 
 Conrad, C. F. Welden and J. Kohler constituted this commit- 
 tee. It reported at the next meeting that in their judgment 
 none of the existing English hymn books was satisfactory to 
 our congregations, and that therefore a book should be pre- 
 pared containing those parts of the Liturgy which are needed 
 for the regular Sunday services, Luther's Catechism, the Augs- 
 burg Confession, and a sufficient number of hymns selected 
 with due regard to the doctrine and usage of our Church. 
 This was adopted and the committee charged with the prep- 
 aration of such a book. By this action the future Church 
 Book of the General Council was in reality outlined and 
 created. 
 
 In 1864 the committee reported that they had succeeded 
 in securing the cooperation of the distinguished hymnologist, 
 the Rev. F. M. Bird, at that time a member of the New York 
 Ministerium. With his advice a list of hymns had been pre- 
 pared. In the following year the work was reported as nearly 
 finished. Drs. Charles Porterfield Krauth and Jos. A. Seiss 
 were added to the committee. The year 1866 brought the 
 crisis at Fort Wayne and the withdrawal of the Pennsylvania 
 Synod from the General Synod, which was followed by the 
 convention at Reading, which laid the foundation of the Gen- 
 eral Council. The Pennsylvania Synod therefore postponed 
 further action on the English hymn book and Liturgy until 
 after the convention in Reading. The committee, however, 
 completed its work of revision and submitted the result of its 
 
5i 
 
 labors to that convention, which appointed a committee of one 
 from each Synod there represented, " to aid the existing com- 
 mittee of the Pennsylvania Synod in the perfecting of their 
 contemplated hymn book." At the first meeting of the Gen- 
 eral Council in 1867, the whole work of the English Liturgy 
 and Hymn Book Committee of the Pennsylvania Synod was 
 formally transferred to and accepted by the General Council 
 in the following action : " That the General Council heartily 
 concur in the propriety and necessity of the publication of a 
 work of the kind proposed, and hereby accept and authorize 
 the publication of the English Church Book prepared by the 
 Ministerium of Pennsylvania." The official title of the book 
 was finally determined and the committee of the Ministerium 
 of Pennsylvania was authorized and instructed to make ar- 
 rangements for the publication of the Church Book, the copy- 
 right to be in trust for the General Council. 
 
 Thus through the wise, steadfast and loyal work of the 
 English committee the Liturgical development of the Minis- 
 terium of Pennsylvania was gradually emancipated from those 
 unsound and un- Lutheran elements which had pervaded the 
 Agenda of 1818, 1842 and 1855, and the pure service of the 
 Lutheran Church of the sixteenth century had at last been 
 restored on the basis of the consensus of the best Agenda of 
 that period. It was right and proper that the German part of 
 the Church should also have the benefit of this happy con- 
 summation. The initiative in this direction naturally came 
 from the General Council. At its first convention a German 
 Church Book Committee was appointed in which all the dis- 
 trict Synods were to be represented. The instructions given 
 to this committee determined that in the German Church Book 
 those hymns should be first collected which we find contained 
 in the best Lutheran hymn books ; that the hymns to be re- 
 ceived should be adopted in their original form ; that only 
 such changes should be made as are already embodied in good 
 Lutheran books ; that hymns in which considerable changes 
 are necessary, should not be embodied in the hymn book ; 
 that the rubrics found in the Pennsylvania Synod's hymn book 
 
52 
 
 should be followed as much as possible ; and that the Litur- 
 gical service be made to conform to that of the English Church 
 Book. At the same time, however, the delegation of the Penn- 
 sylvania Synod was excused from appointing a representative 
 upon the German Church Book Committee. This was done 
 because some brethren seemed to fear that an official partici- 
 pation of the Ministerium in this work might lead to legal 
 difficulties that could be raised on the part of the publishers 
 of the Pennsylvania hymn book of 1849. A few years after- 
 wards, however, the Pennsylvania Synod was well represented 
 in the German Church Book Committee of the General Coun- 
 cil, so that it may truly be said that the Mother Synod had 
 her good and full share in the work on the German book also. 
 And when the work was completed in 1877, the Ministerium 
 took the following action : " The Synod is gratified to hear 
 that the new German Church Book is completed and will, in 
 a few weeks, be in the hands of our congregations ready for 
 use ; and it urgently recommends its introduction and use in 
 all our congregations in which the service is conducted in thej 
 German language. Inasmuch as the plates of the old ('Wol- 
 lenweber ') book, especially those of the small edition, have 
 become unfit for use and the printing of the book must there- 
 fore be discontinued, our congregations are advised to avoid 
 the difficulties arising from this fact by a prompt introduction 
 of the new Church Book." Unfortunately the Synod six years 
 afterwards receded from the position taken in these resolutions 
 when it yielded to the demand of some of its German pastors 
 and congregations and agreed to have the plates of the old 
 Wollenweber book renewed. We .have always looked upon 
 this action as a reactionary measure, and in conflict with the 
 whole Liturgical development of the Mother Synod. And 
 we trust that the time is not distant when the German Church 
 Book will hold the same place of universal appreciation and 
 acceptance which was so readily given to the English book 
 from its very first appearance. 
 
 It is an interesting history which we have surveyed in this 
 brief and fragmentary sketch. After a fine beginning made 
 
53 
 
 by the Fathers in 1748, we have seen the venerable Minis- 
 terium drifting away further and further from the good and 
 solid foundation which had then been laid also for its Litur- 
 gical life. But after years of estrangement, there is at last a 
 return to the precious inheritance of the Reformation era, as 
 in doctrine so also in the service of the Church, and the posi- 
 tion reached in the Church Book is no longer that of our 
 Ministerium alone, it is accepted as the only true one by other 
 Lutheran bodies around us. The Liturgical development of 
 the Pennsylvania Synod culminates in the Church Book of 
 the General Council, and the Church Book of the General 
 Council expands into the Common Service. Thus after a 
 century and a half we see in some measure the hope and 
 prophecy of our Patriarch fulfilled, " that all the Evangelical 
 Lutheran congregations should be united with one another 
 and all use the same order of service." 
 
 A. Spaeth. 
 Philadelphia, Mt. Airy Theological Seminary, 
 November, i8gy. 
 
THE CONFESSIONAL HISTORY OF THE 
 MINISTERIUM OF PENNSYLVANIA. 
 
 To one who turns from the study of the writings of 
 Luther to the literature of the first period of the Ministerium 
 of Pennsylvania, the contrast in doctrine and spirit is indeed 
 most marked. In Luther, the objective element overshadows 
 everything. His great theme is Christ and the certainty and 
 clearness of Christ's promises. As he looks from Christ upon 
 himself, he finds there nothing but corruption and ruin and 
 condemnation ; then as his eyes are fixed anew upon his 
 Redeemer, his faith is all the stronger, because of his knowl- 
 edge how helpless he is by his own powers. Among the 
 Fathers of the Lutheran Church in this country, the atten- 
 tion is occupied far more with processes of self-introspection. 
 As patients who know themselves sick, they are constantly 
 taking and recording the temperature, and searching for the 
 symptoms both of the malady and of returning health. They 
 have all the characteristics of the more sober and healthful 
 form of Pietism. A critical History of Pietism drawn from 
 the sources by a competent American Lutheran scholar, 
 written from a strictly confessional standpoint, and impartially 
 examining the entire controversy which it occasioned, would 
 be a most useful aid to the understanding of the doctrinal 
 position of the missionaries who were sent hither from Halle. 
 The theology of Muhlenberg and his associates differed from 
 that of the Reformation period, not by the rejection of any of 
 the doctrines that the latter accepted, or by attempting any 
 additions, but almost entirely in the variation of emphasis in 
 the doctrines believed and taught. The center of the system 
 was somewhat changed. " Christ for us " was forgotten 
 neither in the preaching nor the life, but it required a con- 
 
55 
 
 tinual struggle, lest the doctrine of " Christ in us" might sup- 
 plant it. The freshness of spiritual life drawn by immediate 
 contact with the arguments of the Holy Scriptures deterior- 
 ates as the same Scriptures are constantly used, chiefly as 
 collections of mottoes and isolated promises, to be simply 
 sources of impulse for pious meditations and reflections. 
 
 This criticism we make with a reverent hand. The Min- 
 isterium of Pennsylvania was founded by men who were earn- 
 est, decided and unyielding in their confession of the faith of 
 the Lutheran Church. On all occasions they made this most 
 prominent. They wished to be regarded as Lutherans not 
 with qualifications and conditions, but accepted heartily all 
 that the Lutheran Church had embodied in its Confessions. 
 They came from a school whose enemies endeavored to the 
 utmost, but without success, to question their orthodoxy, and 
 to erase their names from the number who had the right to be 
 acknowledged as subscribers of the full body of the Lutheran 
 Symbols. John Arnd and Philip Jacob Spener and August 
 Hermann Francke never hesitated to affirm their entire and 
 cordial acceptance of the Formula of Concord, as well as of 
 the Augsburg Confession and Small Catechism. The men 
 sent from the same school to lay the foundation of Protestant 
 missions in the East Indies, had studied well the Confessions 
 and tested them by the Holy Scriptures, when they gave their 
 solemn pledge that the faith they would carry to the heathen 
 would be none other than that therein set forth. Muhlenberg 
 and his associates, trained in the same school, were unwilling 
 to abate a hair's breadth in such requirements. From the set- 
 tlement of the Salzburgers in Georgia, to that of the Lutherans 
 in Nova Scotia, all the German churches of the XVIIIth cen- 
 tury, North and South, were planted upon the same basis. 
 
 In a few months the Ministerium will publish, as a memo- 
 rial of the approaching Jubilee, a volume of documents per- 
 taining to its conventions from 1748 to 181 1. This will place 
 in the hands of students such an overwhelming amount of 
 testimony on this subject, that it seems scarcely worth while 
 to enter here into its details. A few illustrations, not unfa- 
 
56 
 
 miliar to those who have read the Halle Reports, may be 
 given. When e. g., at the first meeting, the Mother Church, 
 St. Michael's, in Philadelphia, was consecrated, the address 
 by Muhlenberg reminded the audience of the fact that "the 
 foundation stones of the church had been laid, with the in- 
 tention that in it the Evangelical Lutheran doctrine should 
 be taught according to the Augsburg Confession and all the 
 other Symbolical Books." When the formal ceremony of con- 
 secration occurred, "the whole church, and its parts, the pulpit, 
 baptismal font, and altar, were again consecrated to the use 
 of the only saving Word, and the Holy Sacraments, accord- 
 ing to our Symbolical books. The Church Council of Phila- 
 delphia had to promise, publicly and orally, that they would 
 strive, with God's assistance, to keep the church according 
 to the foregoing consecration, unto their children and child- 
 ren's children, for the aforename purpose, as long as God 
 would protect it from fire, water and other accidents." When, 
 at the same meeting, the Rev. J. N. Kurtz was ordained, he 
 was pledged to teach nothing, publicly or privately, but what 
 is in accord with the Word of God, and the Confessional 
 Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, and, to this end, 
 to study them diligently. In his written examination, among 
 the answers in the document commended by the authorities 
 at Halle, as better than nine students out of every ten would 
 have given at the time in Germany, is his reply to the question 
 whether the Evangelical Lutheran be the only saving doc- 
 trine. Mr. Kurtz's answer was that, while he was very far 
 from affirming that none but professed Lutherans would be 
 saved, nevertheless that, since wherever God's Word is purely 
 preached, there is the only saving doctrine, and as our Sym- 
 bolical Books are drawn from God's Word, with the Lutheran 
 Church is the alone saving doctrine. 
 
 Only a few weeks ago, by the courtesy of the Rev. L. 
 Kuhlman, of Frederick, Md., we were permitted to read in the 
 earliest book of the venerable congregation at Monocacy, the 
 mother of the Frederick congregation, the confessional pledge 
 of that congregation, written in English, by Muhlenberg him- 
 
57 
 
 self. His Journals tell us that the entry is his. As this clear 
 and precise statement of the basis of the Maryland congrega- 
 tions is, so far as we know, nowhere in print, we insert it as 
 illustrating the foundation upon which all our churches were 
 laid. 
 
 " Whereas, We, the subscribers, enjoy the inestimable liberty of conscience 
 under the powerful protection of our Most Gracious Sovereign, King George the 
 Second, and His Representatives our gracious Superior of this province, and have 
 used this blessed liberty since our first here at Manakasy till this day, in worship- 
 ping God Almighty, according to the Protestant Lutheran persuasion, grounded 
 in the Old and New Testament and in the invariata Augustana Confessione 
 ceterisq. libris Symbolicis ; we will therefore endeavor to pray for our Most 
 Gracious Sovereign and all that are in authority, that we may lead a peaceable 
 and quiet life in all Godliness and Honesty ; and, 
 
 " Whereas, We are several times disturbed by pretended ministers that style 
 themselves Lutherans, but cannot produce any lawful Certificate or Credentials of 
 their Vocation or Ordination of a lawful Consistory or Ministry, and cause strifes j 
 Quarrels and Disputations among the Congregations, 
 
 We, the subscribers, the Church Wardens and Members of the Protestant 
 Lutheran Congregation, erect and constitute and agree and bind ourselves to the 
 following articles, imprimis : 
 
 1. The church we have erected and built at Manakasy and used hitherto 
 shall stand and remain and be for the worship of our Protestant Lutheran Religion 
 according to our Confession and Oeconomie, as long as the blessed acts of Toler - 
 ance and of our liberty stand forever, and the Reformed Congregation shall have 
 liberty for their lawful minister. 
 
 2. No minister shall be admitted and permitted to preach or administer the 
 holy Ordinances in our Church without a lawful Call and Certificate of His law- 
 ful Lutheran Ordination and Examination by a Lutheran Consistory or Ministry, 
 and without consent of the Church Wardens. 
 
 3. Every year shall be chosen four or more blameless Members of our Con- 
 gregation for Church Wardens, and they shall be chosen per plurima vota. 
 
 4. The Church Wardens shall hold and preserve the key of the church, the 
 Vessels and Ornaments that belong to the Church and Congregation, and deliver 
 every piece in time of Worship, or when necessity requireth it. 
 
 5. Two of the Church Wardens shall keep an exact account of the alms 
 and be ready to lay, at the end of the year, the Reckoning before the rest of the 
 Church Wardens and the Congregation. 
 
 6. Whenever a member or Church Warden of our Congregation should 
 turn to another persuasion, or lead a notorious, sinful life against the Ten Com- 
 mandments, or against the Constitutions and laws of our Most Gracious Superiors, 
 he or they shall not be accounted for a member of our Congregation, but be 
 excluded. 
 
 To these before mentioned Articles, which only tend to promote peace and 
 
58 
 
 quietness, we set our hands, this 24th day June, I747> i Q tne 2Ist year of the 
 Reign of our Most Gracious Sovereign, King George the Second, whom the Lord 
 preserve." 
 
 In 1760, Bryzelius was admitted upon his promise "to 
 conform in all my sermons, public and private instruction, 
 and in the administration of the Holy Sacraments, to our 
 Symbolical Books." The succeeding year, when Muhlenberg 
 defended himself against sundry charges preferred by Rev. 
 Lucas Rauss, he challenged him, in the most forcible lan- 
 guage, to adduce a single instance in which his teaching had 
 not been in harmony with all the Symbolical Books. In 1769, 
 Zion Church, Philadelphia, was consecrated, with the partici- 
 pation of the entire Synod " for the use of the German Evan- 
 gelical Lutheran congregation, which confesses the one evan- 
 gelical doctrine, upon the foundation of the Apostles and 
 Prophets, and the two sacraments instituted by Christ, ac- 
 cording to the Unaltered Augsburg Confession and the other 
 Symbolical Books." Such are a few out of many examples 
 that might be cited. 
 
 Hence when we open the first Minute Book of the 
 Ministerium, and read the first Constitution, that was entered 
 there in 1781, and signed by the pastors then belonging to 
 that body, we find the same unequivocal confessional test. 
 
 " Every minister professes that he holds to the Word of 
 God and our Symbolical Books in doctrine and life." When 
 complaints are brought against ministers, the investigation 
 must refer to : " Positive errors opposed to the plain teach- 
 ings of the Holy Scriptures and our Symbolical Books." 
 
 This invariable profession is accompanied by the most 
 ample material, from which may be determined whether the 
 profession be true or false. Dr. Spaeth, in a preceding article, 
 has already answered the question with respect to the Liturgy 
 of 1748. A similar examination might be made with identi- 
 cal results with respect to the congregational constitutions 
 prepared by Muhlenberg, of which that of Zion and St. 
 Michael's of 1762 is the best type. The minute details of 
 the discharge of pastoral duties, and the instructions prepared 
 
59 
 
 for others laboring under him, are in the same spirit. No one 
 will maintain that the judgment of our Fathers was infallible 
 or that they always applied their Lutheran principles so as to 
 be beyond criticism, or as to afford in all respects a model 
 for succeeding generations. But as to their general consist- 
 ency with their emphatic confession, there can be no ques- 
 tion. " Hallensian," it is true, was a favorite nickname, where- 
 by not only renegades whose false pretences they exposed, 
 but even occasionally more respectable men, whose pathway 
 they crossed, endeavored to neutralize their influence. The 
 forthcoming volume will contain the official records and 
 original documents, according to which accuser and accused 
 may be judged. 
 
 Another era entered with the death of Muhlenberg. The 
 Synodical Constitution of 1792 omitted all confessional tests. 
 The significance of this omission must not be exaggerated. 
 As the Constitution of the New York Ministerium corre- 
 sponded almost word for word with this of the Ministerium 
 of Pennsylvania, Dr. Nicum has entered into a very satis- 
 factory discussion of its defects in his invaluable " History of 
 the New York Ministerium." He shows that in New York 
 the confessional obligation was exacted of all who were or- 
 dained, even when the requirement was suppressed in the 
 Constitution. So it may have been for a time in Pennsylvania. 
 The change is explicable probably from the complete revolu- 
 tion effected in the organization by the Constitution of 1792. 
 Lay delegates are now for the first time admitted as regular 
 members of Synod, with the right to a voice and vote. Before 
 this they appeared only for the purpose of conferring with the 
 pastors concerning the affairs of particular congregations, and 
 were called before the Synod and questioned, and then dis- 
 missed, while the pastors acted upon the subjects proposed. 
 It may have been that in reorganizing the Synod to adapt it 
 to this change, it was thought best to obliterate this test, as 
 its continuance would make a difference between the pastors 
 and the lay delegates. But, however this may be, it certainly 
 indicates a degree of indifference to the confessional principle 
 
6o 
 
 that we can not believe that the elder Muhlenberg would have 
 permitted. It is a symptom of a general deterioration, not 
 only doctrinally and spiritually, but in critical scholarship, 
 that characterized the close of the last century. Although 
 Muhlenberg had purchased ground for a seminary as early as 
 1749, his scheme could not be carried out. A few of his suc- 
 cessors, as his sons and Drs. Kunze and Helmuth, had enjoyed 
 the advantages of a German university course, but the great 
 body of the pastors were trained in the studies of other pastors, 
 burdened with numerous engagements, and subject to constant 
 interruptions. The Church is not on a stable foundation, when 
 the most of its pastors have confined their preparation for the 
 ministry only to the study of those branches most needed in 
 pastoral work. The entire experience of the Church must to 
 some extent be known and be kept in view. The second gen- 
 eration of pastors had copied outlines of doctrine furnished by 
 their predecessors, had read a number of volumes in the 
 libraries of their preceptors, and were probably able to read 
 their Greek Testaments and to translate from the Hebrew with 
 a proficiency that would do them credit if they were to sub- 
 mit to an examination to-day, but they were not able to appre- 
 ciate the historical circumstances that rendered our Confes- 
 sions necessary, or, even when they revered these documents, 
 to enter heartily into their life, or defend them against attacks. 
 Explanations and defences there certainly are that show that 
 the meaning of the Confessions is misunderstood. Lutherans 
 allied themselves so closely with the Reformed in the struggle 
 for the perpetuation of the German language, as well as in the 
 perfectly justifiable efforts to resist the political movements 
 against German emigrants and their descendants, that, in the 
 heat of the contest, confessional lines became constantly more 
 obscure. Rationalism entered, partly from Germany, and 
 partly through the New York Ministerium, which was affected 
 by the Socinianism of New England that divided the Congre- 
 gational churches of that period. There was no theological 
 center. The Synod was a loose aggregation of heterogeneous 
 elements, with a degree of liberality and toleration that seemed 
 
6i 
 
 almost boundless. Precipitate action in the face of a great 
 emergency has never been the sin of the Ministerium. It 
 may be well questioned whether her patience has always been 
 a virtue. 
 
 But the Synod, as such, was never committed to any 
 repudiation of the Lutheran faith. The full significance of 
 important changes was not apprehended. The period was 
 simply one of relative doctrinal indifference, and little interest 
 in the associated work for which the Synod had been organ- 
 ized. All along there were faithful pastors content to continue 
 the traditional teaching and to transmit the traditional spirit, 
 as they came from the earlier period. Nor have we the right 
 to assume that in most instances this was a mere tradition. 
 There were truly spiritually minded men in the second as 
 well as in the first period, by whose ministry a sound con- 
 gregational life was maintained even when the synodical life 
 left much to be regretted and desired. 
 
 A most important document bearing upon this history 
 has been found recently by Rev. Dr. Hull, at Hartwick Semi- 
 nary. It is a letter of Dr. Kunze, written in 1805, full of lam- 
 entation over the deterioration in doctrine both in Germany 
 and America. " We are unanimous," he writes in an open 
 letter to his brethren of the New York Ministerium, " in ad- 
 hering to the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, in that pure 
 and simple sense in which it was taught and explained in the 
 Primitive Church, and revived three hundred years ago by the 
 Reformers. . . . We all abhor the neological attempts of 
 robbing Christ of His divine majesty, His atonement of its all- 
 sufficient power, the Word of God of its energy, His ordi- 
 nances of their efficacy, the Spirit of God of His exclusive 
 agency in the reformation of man, and the Gospel of its pre- 
 eminent feature, Free Grace Dreadful as it may 
 
 sound, it is nevertheless the result of my continuing to read 
 German publications and of my continued German correspond- 
 ence that I assert, should we send for ten candidates to place 
 them in our vacant congregations, it is highly probable that 
 we would have one resembling our brother just mentioned, 
 
62 
 
 and nine despisers, yea, blasphemers of Christ. . . . Let 
 me add to your comfort and joy — the numerous ministry of 
 Pennsylvania is, and remains, of our mode of thinking. In 
 Germany some faithful servants of God have associated them- 
 selves for instructing young candidates for the pulpit, in order 
 to counteract the academical poison they may have imbibed." 
 In the catechetical class and in the pulpit, the distinct- 
 ive doctrines of our Church were always taught by some 
 members of the Ministerium. In the earlier years of my 
 ministry, in portions of the territory that had long ceased 
 to be within our bounds, I repeatedly heard from some of 
 the older members the explanation of the doctrine of the 
 Lord's Supper given when they were catechumens, as well as 
 other elements pertaining to the practice, that showed how 
 deep and permanent the impression that was made by the first 
 period of the Synod. Not only were the devotional books of 
 our Church faithfully read by the more intelligent of our 
 people, but the German Bibles, with their extensive Lutheran 
 glosses and an apparatus for explanation, scarcely excelled 
 by the " Teacher's Bibles" of to-day, and containing some- 
 times the Augsburg Confession, furnished in many a quiet 
 country home the material for study on the frequent Sundays, 
 when, in large parishes, the household was without the privi- 
 lege of public worship. Even to the present day the hymn- 
 books of the first period, with their valuable supplementary 
 material, may be found in the homes of some of our members, 
 with evidences of the faithful use they have had from probably 
 several generations of owners. Even though the pastors 
 might become indifferent, and the public teachers of the next 
 generation be openly antagonistic to the Lutheran faith, a new 
 generation of pastors was constantly springing up from the 
 homes of our more devout members, whose spiritual life had 
 been nurtured from childhood at these sources. 
 
 The Memorial Volume will not reach the era of return 
 to the confessional position of the Fathers. This return was 
 accomplished by slow but steady approaches, and required 
 the efforts of earnest men and the leadings of the Divine Provi- 
 
6 3 
 
 dence for a half century. The dawn of this day was the Ter- 
 centenary Jubilee of the Reformation in 1817, with the 
 renewed interest it gave both in Germany and America to the 
 study of the living issues of the period in which our Church 
 originated. The movement advanced by a constant struggle 
 in which the deteriorating process often seemed not only to 
 be holding its own, but even to be able to attain greater 
 triumphs than ever. The formation of the General Synod at 
 the call of the Ministerium of Pennsylvania was one of the 
 first steps forward. Forced to withdraw, to the great regret 
 of the majority of the pastors, because of widespread preju- 
 dices among the people against a general organization, the 
 leaders who remained and shaped its first policy, were largely 
 men born, baptized and ordained in the Mother Synod. The 
 reassertion of the confessional principle was the inevitable re- 
 sult of the existence of a body that aimed at aggressive work. 
 With the establishment of a theological seminary a definite 
 doctrinal basis could not be long deferred ; and then came the 
 struggle as to whether this basis should be entirely new, or a 
 restoration of the historical basis of the Fathers, or an amend- 
 ment of that basis. The confessional history of the Ministerium 
 cannot be separated from that of her child, the General Synod, 
 during the years in which she was independent of it so far as 
 organic union was concerned, but in close relations in all 
 other respects. For details, we refer to the first volume of 
 Dr. Spaeth's Memoir of Dr. Krauth, which will appear within 
 a few weeks. Whether men desired to consider the question 
 or not, they could not evade giving an answer as to why they 
 professed to be Lutherans, and what it meant to be called a 
 Lutheran. Under the pressure of such inquiries, search was 
 made for the testimony of the Fathers, and the seeds which 
 had been lying dormant for years began to grow. The fact 
 that the Ministerium had been slow to respond to the process 
 of anglicising, often lamented as a loss, had at this time been 
 an advantage, as she was thus preserved in the enjoyment of 
 many cherished Lutheran practices, that, with the return to 
 confessional consciousness, were made to yield rich fruit. 
 
6 4 
 
 The Tennessee Synod, from its formation in 1820, was the 
 most pronounced advocate of a strict adherence to the full 
 body of the Lutheran Confessions, although unfortunately it 
 weakened its influence by its antagonism to theological sem- 
 inaries. The publication of Muller's Symbolical Books dur- 
 ing the '40s, and the importation about 1849 of a large number 
 of copies, the English translation of these Books by the Hen- 
 kels in 1851, the founding of the Evangelical Review at Get- 
 tysburg, the publication of the Zcitschrift by Pastor Brobst 
 at Allentown, the purchase and generous distribution of a 
 large number of copies of the Hallesche Nachrichten by Dr. 
 H. H. Muhlenberg, of Reading, all contributed powerfully 
 toward the attainment of the result reached when the Gen- 
 eral Council was founded in 1867. The influence of the co- 
 temporaneous discussions in Germany must not be over- 
 looked; but they were not decisive. 
 
 In the Evangelical Review, Vol. V, 1 89-2 1 3, there is an 
 interesting paper prepared for the meeting of the Ministerium 
 at Easton in 1853, and read as the report of a committee by 
 Dr. Charles F. Schaeffer. It is unfortunate that its length 
 prevented its insertion in the minutes. It is a careful study 
 as to what the Ministerium means in its Liturgy and other 
 publications by the expression, " The Confession of the Lu- 
 theran Church." An examination is made of the confessional 
 history of the Ministerium, as a long preamble to resolutions, 
 whereby its learned author hoped at that time to restore the 
 Synod to the basis upon which it had been founded. The 
 result was, for the time, a compromise, which, although un- 
 satisfactory to Dr. Schaeffer, certainly marked a great ad- 
 vance, and prepared the way for the unequivocal attitude of 
 the Synod in later years. The main resolution read : " Re- 
 solved, That we also, in common with the Evangelical Lu- 
 theran Church of our Fathers, acknowledge the collective 
 body of the Symbolical Books, as the historical and confes- 
 sional writings of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, and that 
 we also, like the Lutheran^Church of former times, accord to 
 the Unaltered Augsburg Confession and Luther's Small Cate- 
 
65 
 
 chism, an especial importance among our Symbolical Books 
 generally." 
 
 In the formation of the General Council, the Ministerium 
 has made a second attempt to establish a general organiza- 
 tion of Lutheran Synods in America. In this effort, she has 
 laid as the prerequisite of such union the precise doctrinal 
 basis on which the Ministerium itself was founded in 1748, 
 nothing more and nothing less. On this, her one hundred 
 and fiftieth anniversary, she unfurls the same banner that was 
 brought by our leaders from our mother country when they 
 came hither to do their part in subduing this land to Christ. 
 
 Henry E. Jacobs. 
 
/ 
 
 9 
 
 b 
 
 s 
 
Date Due 
 
 *** 
 
 •"■ ' 
 
 
 
 
 _ja^^/!^z 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ; 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ; 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 <§>! 
 
 PRINTED 1 
 
 N U. S. A. 
 
 
BX8061 .P413 
 
 In commemoration of the 150th 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer Library 
 
 1 1012 00041 0268