The Lutherans of New York Part 8

The Longobards crossed the Alps and settled in Italy where their children speak Italian, although Lombardy is just across the mountains, not far from the early home of their immigrant ancestors.

A notable exception to this tendency of the Germans to amalgamate with other nations was when the Anglo-Saxons invaded Britain. The island had been deserted by the Romans, and the Germans refused for centuries to ally themselves with the British inhabitants. They retained their own language and customs with but a slight admixture of alien elements.* To this day after twelve centuries they prefer to call themselves Anglo-Saxons rather than British. (_Nomen a potiori fit._) *"Philologically, English, considered with reference to its original form, Anglo-Saxon, and to the grammatical features which it retains of Anglo-Saxon origin, is the most conspicuous member of the Low German group of the Teutonic family, the other Low German languages being Old Saxon, Old Friesic, Old Low German, and other extinct forms, and the modern Dutch, Flemish, Friesic, and Low German (Platt Deutsch).

These, with High German, const.i.tute the 'West Germanic' branch, as Gothic and the Scandinavian tongues const.i.tute the 'East Germanic'

branch, of the Teutonic family. (Century Dictionary under the word 'English.')"

In the ninth and eleventh centuries the island was invaded by other Germanic tribes, directly by way of the North Sea or indirectly by the Channel from Normandy, and so the language was developed still further along English, that is Germanic lines. (According to the Century Dictionary the historical p.r.o.nunciation of the word is eng'-glish and not ing'glish).

Low Germans, (Nether Saxons or Platt Deutsch) who have settled in New York in such large numbers, enjoy a distinct advantage over other nationalities. In the vernacular of America they discover simply another dialect of their native tongue. Hence they acquire the new dialect with little difficulty. The simpler words and expressions of the common people are almost the same as those which they used on the sh.o.r.es of the North Sea and the Baltic. For example: _Wo is min Vader?_ Where is my father? _He is in the Hus._ He is in the house. English and German sailors from opposite sh.o.r.es of the North Sea, using the simpler words of their respective languages, have no trouble in making themselves understood when they meet.

The High Germans learn English more slowly, but they, too, find many points of contact, not only in the words but also in the grammatical construction of the language.

In the United States the descendants of Germans number seventeen millions. They have made no inconsiderable contributions to the sum total of American civilization. For philological reasons, as we have seen, no people are more ready than the Germans to adopt English for every-day use. None amalgamate more easily with the political and social life of the country of their choice. In normal times we do not think of them as foreigners.

English has the right of way. Its composite character makes it the language for every-day use. Thirty-five languages are spoken in this city, but the a.s.similative power of English absorbs them all. The Public School is the effective agent in the process. This is the melting pot for all diversities of speech. Children dislike to be looked upon as different from their companions, and so it rarely happens that the language of the parents is spoken by the second generation of immigrant families. Their elders, even when their "speech bewrayeth" them, make strenuous efforts to use the language of their neighbors.

Seeing, then, that Anglicization is inevitable, why should we not cut the Gordian knot, and conduct our ministry wholly in the English language? This would greatly simplify our tasks, besides removing from us the stigma of foreignism.

We are often advised to do so, especially by our monoglot brethren.

There are those who go so far as to say that the use of any language other than the English impairs the Americanism of the user.

Some of the languages at present used in our church services may be of negligible importance. The Slovak, Magyar and Finnish for example, as well as the Lettish, Esthonian and Lithuanian of the Baltic Provinces, will never have more than a restricted use in this city. The Scandinavians and those whose vernacular is the Low German easily subst.i.tute English for their mother tongue. Scandinavian is kindred to English, while Low German is the very group of which, philologically speaking, English is the most conspicuous member. Upon these tongues it will not be necessary to do summary execution.

It is a different matter, however, when we come to High German, or, properly speaking, New High German, the language of German literature since the sixteenth century, of which Luther, through his version of the Bible, may be called the creator. He at least gave it universal currency. This is a language which we could not lose if we would, and would not if we could.

Scholars are compelled to learn it because it is the indispensable medium for scientific and philosophical study. Formerly Latin was this medium, today it is German.

Lovers of literature learn it because it is the language of Goethe and Schiller, the particular stars of a galaxy that for the modern world at least outs.h.i.+nes the productions of the ancient cla.s.sics. Lutherans enshrine it in their inmost souls because it is the receptacle of treasures of meditation and devotion with which their forms of wors.h.i.+p have been enriched for four hundred years. To ignore Angelus Silesius, Paul Gerhardt, Albert Knapp, Philip Spitta and their glorious compeers, would be to silence a choir that sang the praises of the Lord "in notes almost divine."

We need the literature in which the ideas of our church have for centuries been expressed. Language is the medium of ideas. The thirty denominations that const.i.tute the bulk of Protestantism in this country derive the spirit of their church life for the most part from non-Lutheran sources through the medium of English literature. This is as it should be. But when Lutherans no longer understand the language of their fathers or the literature in which the ideas of their confession have found their fullest expression, they lose an indispensable condition of intellectual and spiritual growth. They can never understand as they should the spirit of the church to which they belong.

They are doomed sooner or later to share the fate of the Lutherans of New York of the eighteenth century.

When we have forgotten our German we shall be out of touch with the Lutherans who come to us from the Fatherland. For the time being the World War has put an end to German immigration, but this will not last forever. Some time certainly immigration will be resumed, and as in former periods will be an unfailing source of supply for the Lutheran churches of New York.

In the nineteenth century the "Americanized" Lutherans did not understand the Germans who came over in such overwhelming numbers, and were unprepared to shepherd them in Lutheran folds. The work had to be done by immigrant pastors who, on their part, did not understand the American life well enough to accomplish the best results. For the sake of the Lutherans who come to us from foreign lands we cannot afford to lose touch with the historical languages of their churches.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century the use of German had sunk almost to zero. The minutes of the German Society had to be written in English because no one was sufficiently versed in German to write them in this language. There was nothing to interfere with the supremacy of English. Yet the English Lutheran church was unable to "propagate the faith of the fathers in the language of the children." Down to the beginning of the twentieth century, the English churches were dependent for their growth upon accessions from the German and Scandinavian churches. They were unable to retain even the families they had inherited from their Dutch and German ancestors. We search in vain for descendants of the New York Lutherans of the eighteenth century in any of our churches.

Not until a new contribution of immigrants from Lutheran lands had been made to America did our church begin to rise to a position of influence.

When in the second quarter of the nineteenth century the first self-sustaining English Lutheran church was established, the Ockershausens and other children of immigrants were the strong pillars of its support. From that day to the present time not a single English Lutheran church has been established and maintained in this city where the Schierens, the Mollers and scores of others, immigrants or the children of immigrants, were not the chief supporters of the work.

Without their effective aid the English Lutherans of the nineteenth century would have been swallowed up by "the denominations that are around us" as were their predecessors of the eighteenth century.

Some of our Anglo-American neighbors are concerned about our political welfare. They advise us to drop the German in order that we may become "Americanized."

Many of us are the children of Germans who tilled the soil of America before there was a United States of America.

The Germans of the Mohawk Valley won at Oriskany, according to Was.h.i.+ngton, the first battle of importance in the American Revolution.*

[Tr. note: original has no footnote to go with this asterisk]

The Germans of Pennsylvania, long a neutral colony on account of its large English population, obtained the right of suffrage in May, 1776, and turned the scale in favor of liberty. Through their vote Pennsylvania was brought by a narrow margin into line with Virginia and Ma.s.sachusetts which would otherwise have remained separated and unable to make effective resistance against the armies of King George.

The Germans of Virginia followed their Lutheran pastor, Peter Muehlenberg, and made memorable the loyalty of American Lutherans.

Steuben, the drillmaster of the Revolution, transformed the untrained and helpless troops of Was.h.i.+ngton into an effective force capable of meeting the seasoned soldiers of Cornwallis and Burgoyne.

Our German ancestors were peasants, unable to write history, but they helped to make history. Without their timely aid there would not have been a United States of America. Their children do not need to be "Americanized." Nor have later immigrants from Germany and Scandinavia, at any period of our history, shown less loyalty to American ideals.

We may concede the hegemony of English in the political and intellectual life of America, but in a great country like America there is room for others also. It is a narrow view of our civilization to make "American"

synonymous with English. America is not the dumping ground of the nations. It is a land where the best ideals of all nations may be reproduced and find room for expansion and growth.

The German and Scandinavian churches of New York are not ignorant of the importance of the English language in the maintenance of their church work. (See table of Churches in the Appendix.) With scarcely an exception they make all possible use of English in their services. This they are compelled to do in order to reach their children. In this way, and by making generous contributions of their members to the English churches, they are doing their full share in the general work of church extension in the English language.

They send their sons into the ministry to an extent that has not been approached by our English churches. (See Appendix under Sons of the Church.) Nearly all of these are bi-lingual in their ministerial work and many of them serve exclusively English churches. There is a proverb about killing the goose that lays the golden egg, which we would do well to bear in mind.

Concordia Seminary in St. Louis, founded by Dr. Walther and the Germans of Missouri, numbers 344 students. Candidates for graduation must be able to minister in at least two languages. In a polyglot church such as ours this would seem to be a policy worthy of imitation.

The fifteen languages in which we minister to our people confer upon us an honorable distinction. Each one represents an individuality which cannot be ignored, some spiritual gift which is worth exercising and preserving. By keeping in touch with this many-sided life we enrich our own lives, obtain broader conceptions of the church's mission, and fit ourselves for more effective service in this most cosmopolitan city of the world. Instead of trying to exterminate these languages, let us cultivate a closer acquaintance with them and let us pray for that pentecostal spirit which will enable us to say "we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of G.o.d."

The Problem of Members.h.i.+p

Three cla.s.ses of members are recognized in our churches: 1, Those who have been baptized. 2, Those who have been confirmed-that is, those who after the prescribed course of instruction and examination have been admitted to the communion. 3, Communicants-that is, those who are in active fellows.h.i.+p with the church in the use of the word and the sacrament.*

*The temporal affairs of the congregation as a civic corporation are regulated by the State and the qualifications of a voting member are defined in the laws of the State. This chapter deals only with the question of members.h.i.+p in the church as a spiritual body. In general the State readily acquiesces in the polity of the various churches so long as it does not interfere with the civic rights of the individual.

There is a fourth cla.s.s of which no note is taken in our church records.

It is the cla.s.s of lapsed Lutherans-that is, of those who have been admitted to full communion but who have slipped away and are no longer in active connection with the church.

Of these we shall speak in a separate chapter.

It is sometimes charged that the Lutheran communion does not hold clear views of the church. On the one hand her confessions abound in definitions of the church as a spiritual kingdom, as a fellows.h.i.+p of believers. On the other hand her practice frequently reminds our brother Protestants of the Catholics, and they are disposed to look upon us as Romanists, _minorum gentium_. "Like a will-of-the-wisp," says Delitzsch, "the idea of the church eludes us. It seems impossible to find the safe middle ground between a false externalism on the one hand and a false internalism on the other hand."

The Lutheran position can only be understood when we recall the situation that confronted the Reformers in the sixteenth century. They had first of all to interpret the teachings of Scripture over against Rome, and hence in their earlier confessions they emphasized the points on which they differed from the Pope.

According to Romish doctrine a man became a member of the church, not by an _interna virtus,_ but solely through an external profession of faith and an external use of the sacraments. The church is as visible and perceptible an organization as is "the kingdom of France or the republic of Venice." The church is an inst.i.tution rather than a communion.

For thirteen centuries, from Cyprian to Bellarmin, this doctrine held almost undisputed sway.

The Reformers demonstrated the significance of faith, and showed the untenableness of Rome's conception of the church as a mere inst.i.tution.

Thomasius calls this a central epoch in the history of the world. But at the same time the Reformers had to take a stand against the hyperspiritual positions of the fanatics, as well as the teachings of the Zwinglians who denied the efficacy of the means of grace. The confessions, therefore, as well as the subsequent writings of Melanchthon and the dogmaticians, and the entire history and development of the Lutheran churches must be read in the light of this two-fold antagonism.

The system which the Reformers controverted must have had features acceptable to the natural man or it would not have prevailed for so many centuries. Hence it is not surprising when Romanism creeps back into nominally Protestant churches. It behooves us, therefore, to be on our guard and to purge out the old leaven. And the opposite tendency which undervalues the visible church, must also be corrected by a Scriptural doctrine of the ordinances.

The practice of our churches is a resultant mainly of three forces:

1. Doctrine, defined in the Confessions, modified by Melanchthon's later writings and by the dogmaticians of the 17th century, considerably influenced also by Spener and the Pietists, while not a little has come to us from the Rationalistic period.

2. Tradition, from the civil and social arrangements of the national churches from which we are descended, inherited through generations of our predecessors in this country. We follow in the old ruts, and "the way we have always been doing" puts an end to controversy.

3. Environment. Consciously or unconsciously we are influenced by the practice of neighboring denominations.