# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_Juli 1855_S195
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

The Erlangen “Journal for Protestantism and the Church.” 195

“more or less among the ranks of the Rationalists who insist on the quatenus, a form of subscription that may indeed be applied to the decrees of the Council of Trent or the Synod of Dort and the like, but not to our confession.”

Such is the passage. We shall not add a lengthy commentary. “Scripture is to be interpreted according to the Symbol, and as a Lutheran one must appeal to Scripture only when dealing with non-Lutherans!” So let anyone who thinks it necessary to write a “scriptural proof” beware! So let Löhe and Wucherer and others see how they can come to terms with the Missouri Synod when they speak of a further development of confessional understanding on the basis of Holy Scripture!

Is this sound theology? Is this not proof that matters stand badly on both sides in North America? God knows that we ask this with pain and in love. From another quarter we hear that the Lutheran Church, especially as represented by the Missouri Synod, has great prospects in North America. God be praised for keeping His gracious hand over His Church even there, where men do so much to create confusion and impede the joyful progress of events. God overlooks human weakness because, as we gladly believe and hope, He does not fail to find good will and honest intent there. Yet the more we rejoice in these prospects, and the more faithfully and lovingly we follow conditions in North America, particularly the work of the Missourians, the less are we willing to withhold the wish that the brethren over there may preserve humility and an open ear for a warning voice sincerely meant!

* * *

Such is the article. We consider it necessary to offer an explanation on our part, chiefly concerning two points in it.

The “Journal” says first: “Let us remember that the two Missourians who visited us several years ago found among us all sorts of questionable writings produced by men whom we count among our orthodox theologians. To our knowledge, they did not tell us this while in Germany, but immediately after returning home they informed their countrymen of it in the ‘Lutheraner.’ It is therefore natural to suppose that their confidence in us and our theology is not particularly great and that they probably believe themselves to have outgrown our instruction.” — To this we have only the following brief reply. If the writer thereby casts suspicion upon us—the delegates of the Synod of Missouri, etc., who spent several weeks in Erlangen four years ago—as though, from whatever motives, we had concealed our disagreement concerning the theology prevailing in Erlangen while we were present there, but had then immediately expressed it publicly here, we can explain this only by assuming that the very writer of those lines was present at the conversations