d) great harshness and tyranny in word and deed during the catechism lessons towards confirmed and unconfirmed children. With words such as pfui!, shame on you, repeated one time after another. Boy, you're dreaming! — and if the children did not know something, he made them stand up for 10 minutes without saying a word. In deeds: He had sent the boy E. S. out of the church; he used abusive language against children, who did not know the lesson from the confirmation class and treated them as though they were little devils and hellions. He wanted to have nothing more to do with them and wished he had stayed in Wisconsin, etc. In the church, when a boy had mispronounced the word reputation in discussing the 8th Commandment, he did not correct the boy but rather led him by the shirt button to the front of the congregation and heaped word of shame upon him. e) harsh treatment of the entire congregation in that he banned all coughing in church and, in order to show it was possible to eliminate coughing, he told a profane story during the sermon of a soldier onboard ship, who was not allowed to cough because he would have been stabbed to death by the others. He also brought forth other profane and laughable allegories in his sermons, including Jewish vignettes delivered with a Jewish accent whereby the congregation was incited to laughter and then he punished them for laughing, as though the congregation had committed the vilest of sins! f) Unseemly disturbance of the church service, in which he left the altar during the distribution of the eucharist in order to stop people from leaving. Another time he escorted a woman, who wanted to leave, by the arm. g) Because of an injured finger and arm, which were slow in healing, he suspended the sermon and the administration of the eucharist for over a quarter of a year; when a finger was slow in healing he distributed the eucharist wearing a woolen finger cover and several times he wore a full hand glove. He was reproached for this sinful and self-absorbed pampering by true church members and by Pastor von Rohr, especially since he did not attend church services for fear of becoming ill again. h) Since the month of January of this year no child has been baptised by Pastor Krause in the church, rather for the sake of his personal comfort children must be brought to his house, even when he had preached in the morning, except for one occasion in 1849. i) He had previously opened and closed administrator's meetings without a prayer, thus leaving the administrators doubtful of God's blessing. — And so on and so on. — The concerned church members assured us that all the testimony given was delivered without hatred and with the Christian intent of bringing their spiritual caregiver to repentance and atonement through Christian warning. They would again receive him with open arms in the spirit of Christian reconcilation.

6. Speech and Warning to Pastor Krause by the Congregation in Martinsville After the above-described hearing the congregation in Martinsville decided to warn Pastor Krause one more time. This happened on September 15th. The written warning raised 26 points, some points on teaching, others on Pastor Krause's lifestyle. Two deputies of the congregation delivered the warning to him and the Senior Minister was requested to read it aloud to him in the presence of both deputies. The summary follows. 1) He should recognize that his resignation from office in Martinsville was a sin. 2) He should recognize that his resignation from his church ministry and synod was improper and sinful. 3) He should cease to tell the lie that no one in Martinsville had reproached him for his teaching and conduct. 4) He should cease to call the complaints from church members fictions and slanders and submit to proper investigation. 5) It is arrogant and hierarchical of him to reject and spurn the warnings of his ministerial brothers in office. He should not spurn his church court but instead allow everything to be investigated. 6) He should acknowledge as untrue that in the note on page 49 Johann Arnd's True Christianity is set alongside pietistical books. They warned him to recognize that much more was extracted from it and that it is proper, when true teachers of the church point out deficiencies even in good books, they are doing as Luther had done in his own writings. He should submit to the judgment of the synod on the appropriateness of the note. 7) He should recognize that his threat to preach against the note on his own authority is mutinous and schismatic. 8) It was sinful and slanderous that he had revealed to the members of the congregation in Martinsville the disunity, which existed between him and his ministerial brothers in office. 9) He must recognize that his wife had fallen into the same sin when she intentionally spread news of the disunity in order to raise tempers against the synod and the other pastors. 10) He should certainly recognize that it was a sin when he suppressed rather than investigated a complaint from W. Wurl that his children had behaved badly. He stated that his children were being insulted even though the testimony of W. Wurl was confirmed. 11) It was a sin when he exercised such excessive harshness in the public catechism exams. 12) He had menaced and tyrannically treated the Christian congregation when he forebad coughing. (N.B. There was one woman, who became deathly sick because she had to go out into the cold when she coughed.) 13) He left the altar during the distribution of the eucharist and placed himself before the church door in order to prevent congregation members from leaving. 14) He had expelled confirmation condidates from the lesson with harshness and excessive scolding and filled the children with servile fear.

14) In his sinful feebleness he had carried on with great harshness against his church children and neglected his ministry because he feared he might get sick again! 15) He was often loathe to visit the sick and bring comfort to the dying, fearfully avoiding such situations with his unfriendly behavior, for example with the words, "He was not a bedside preacher." 16) He preached separatism against his ministerial brothers - What are Pastor Grabau and Pastor Rohr to me! etc. 17) He also publically slandered the confirmed children of his brother in office, von Rohr, as if the confirmation instruction was not sufficient. 18) He taught indecent things concerning confession in that he threatened that those, who did not name their sins, would not receive absolution. 19) In his sermons he often threatened to leave his congregation if they were not ahppy with his preaching. 20) He held the Christian congregation in contempt and perplexed conscience when he stated, "There are not 10 people in the congregation, who have properly confessed." Additionally he said that he found no Christians in Martinsville. 21) He permitted members of his family to stay away from the church for long periods of time and, to the vexation of all, he permitted his eldest daughter to go out on walks during the church services. 22) Seeking his own personal comfort, he baptised children in his house, thus appearing to be lazy and contemptuous of public church service. 23) He made godparents, who had come a long way with their godchildren, wait to be baptised until he took a walk; this was a sinful sign of contempt for his church children and the administration of baptism. 24) He had created a scandal when he also did not attend church services in Buffalo, nor did he visit the church even once. Instead he went for walks during church services, contrary to Hebrews 10, 24. This was the major reason for his fall. 25) He wanted to abandon his church children in a congregational assembly and he called them Laodiceans without proof. 26) He vexed his congregation in that he wanted to do away with the third feastday and then he justified his actions with a lie. After this warning from the Martinsville congregation was read aloud to Pastor Krause, he promised to examine all these points and to submit his declaration on September 23rd at our ministerial session. He showed himself to be as willing and accomodating as ever. We left him with a hope for his holy repentance. On Saturday evening, September 21st, he told Pastor Grabau that he wanted to go to Hamburg on the Elbe next year. 7. Our last discussions with and warnings to Pastor Krause A.) Monday afternoon, September 23, 1850. After the warning of the Martinsville congregation was read to him once again, he stated that things were too complex for him to address all the points, however he wanted to reconcile with the church ministry and his congregation.

In consequence, 1.) those points were reinterated by which he might reconcile with his brothers in office. 2.) The points were reiterated by which he might reconcile with his congregation, concerning which it was necessary that there be accord among us in order to avoid many discussions and disputes before the congregation. Concerning points 1, 2 and 3 in the Martinsville warning he admitted his guilt after much explanation and refutation of his extenuating circumstances; it was especially difficult to convince him of the sins of deceitfulness. He conceded to point 4. He conceded point 5, that he had committed a sin in calling his ministerial brothers hierarchical because of the warning, however he called the charges of Emilie R. false and foolish. Dismissing this as yet another untruth, the Senior Minister reproached him: this has nothing to do with the triviality of particular subjects, and whether or not Emilie R. is or is not reliable; rather it deals with how this charge has been handled ministerially because the charge of greed had been raised against Pastor Krause and that charge had been raised by his own wife. The proof of greed would be established and it was not foolishness; it demanded investigation. The investigation was the result of his own admissions that he really did suffer from the sin of filthy greed. He should repentantly acnkowledge this. The proof of greed came from 1.) his own admission and that of his wife. 2.) His own previously covert existence when he acquired and saved money. 3.) His own remarks to Pastor Grabau - nothing had been added to his supply of money in Martinsville. That was indeed poverty since the supply of money had dwindled! 4.) From his and his wife's accusations and slanders of the Martinsville congregation and even the Freistadt congregation - as if they had to suffer hardship, as if they had no bread, as if their daughter had to be sent to Buffalo to earn their bread. 5.) Furthermore, since his daughter had to earn money for herself by working in Martinsville, by laundering young people's underwear, there certainly was money saved for her, and finally, 6.) his feigned poverty in that he said that he was poorer than when he was a student or theological candidate when he had money saved in order to pay off previous debts. We warned him to recognize that this was greed, that he was denying a blessing of God and depriving his family because he had designated this money to a particular purpose. Concerning these things Pastor Krause stated: He would only say how he had come by the money. After arriving in Wisconsin in 1841, his wife still had $70 in travel money. He and his wife bought 20 acres of land from Güttner, which they later sold and used the money to purchase a city lot in Milwaukee. Then Güttner purchased 40 acres of land and promised it to Pastor Krause so that the daughter could have it in payment for nursing him when he was sick. These 40 acres, bequeathed by Güttner, he then sold. This was the money they had brought with them. The city lot was also sold and a portion of that money was set aside. Incidentally, he stood by his statement and he still contends

that in general he struggles to survive and he would not admit to being guilty of feigned poverty. The repeated warning to him to acknowledge his sinful stance, his lack of self discipline and his harshness with the church children was useless. He denied everything and attempted to condone it. He said that it was impossible to give account for all these points raised by the congregation and it was impossible to apolize to the congregation and the children even when he was told that it would be possible to alter many opinions by submitting to a proper investigation. He maintained that the congregation had falsely accused him and he was well aware, he added, what they intended by all this! God will judge the matter! Thus he left us with a mistrustful remark as though we and the Martinsville congregation wanted to depose him. B.) Tuesday, September 24th. He was reprimanded for his mistrustful abandonment of us and for having unrepentantly defended the sins of greed, feigned poverty, denial of God's blessings, harshness with his congregation and lack of self discipline. It was especially sinful that he considered his true ministerial brothers, who earnestly sought his sanctity, enemies and persecutors, who only wanted to overthrow him. We merely desired that he clear things up and vindicate himself in the face of these sins or offer repentance. He was also reprimanded for his disloyal and improper behavior towards his children in that he held back the property bequeathed by Güttner to them. He had hidden the fact from his son-in-law that he was the legal co-owner. It was the evil root of greed which caused him to steal from his own children. Pastor Krause responded that he was not greedy and he had not kept the money out of greed but rather because he had debts to pay and preferred to save the money. He had come to an understanding with his children and they were willing to let them (the parents) use the money for the time being and after their death the children would distribute among themselves whatever money remained. — This contradicted the statement he had made the day before, therefore he must have been lying when he stated that the money did not belong to him but to his children and that he wanted to pay off earlier incurred student debts. This makes him, we said, guilty of injustice and thievery since he took someone else's property and wanted to use it to pay off his own debts. One could not commit such evil and expect good to come from it. If they had consigned the money over to him or if his children had an understanding with him that he could use the money for the time being without their making any claims to it — and then he represented himself as utterly impoverished and denied the gift of God — then he was guilty of feigned poverty and filthy greed. He could not refute this proof because it was derived from his own life circumstances. He was also told that in the first case he was a thief, who stole someone else's property by withholding it. To this he said that he didn't want to answer any more questions. He fell silent and let everything pass over him. We could learn nothing, so God will have to decide.

Go on to pages 103 - 107

Copy of text provided by the A. R. Wentz Library, Lutheran Theological Seminary, Gettysburg, PA

Imaging and Translation by Susan Kriegbaum-Hanks