# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_August 1855_S246
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

246 The Union.

[illegible]; whether they wished to belong to this confession. I suspect that not very many would come forward. The distress of the congregations and pastors would hardly be so great. It goes without saying that patience would have to be shown toward those weak in faith; this is only what has already been repeatedly noted as necessary at all times. But what of the university theologians, whom we must, of course, regard as those who fight for the Union as though for altar and hearth? Well, in Prussia they would probably act much as they do in other countries where the Union has not been introduced. We could not support requiring the entire generation of professors now living suddenly to teach in a strictly Lutheran or strictly Reformed manner. But teachers of Lutheran convictions would once again naturally gather at the Lutheran universities, and those of Reformed convictions at the Reformed universities. I believe the least concern would be that theological scholarship might perish as a result. Hagenbach’s recent attempt to identify the principle of each also shows that a Lutheran and a Reformed theology are by no means absurdities. Meanwhile, one could calmly wait to see whether theological scholarship might not eventually divide once again into its two branches, Lutheran and Reformed. —

The highest goal of our desires and prayers is, of course, the proper resolution of the dispute in the fullness of truth, insofar as knowledge of it is possible for us here: the Union that truly has divine authority, in united faith and confession. But this is not advanced by the false Union, whose principle is to ignore the disagreement and to console itself concerning it on the grounds that it does not affect the foundation. On the contrary, for the true Union to come, the false one must give way. Certainly, what God has joined together man must not separate; but neither should man seek to hold together what God has not united. If a fracture has healed incorrectly, there is no other remedy: however painful it may be, the limb must be broken again. If a wound has closed only on the outside while continuing to fester within, there is no other help than to make an incision. Thus we believe it fully compatible with love—and perhaps the highest exercise of love—when we oppose the false Union. Whether in doing so we proceed with a “light” heart, whether we have “fallen so far from unity and become so entangled in the sad habit of great divisions that even our awareness of this fallen condition and our longing to regain the lost good have gradually vanished”—may the Lord judge. In conflict, the heart can, of course, easily grow hard. But who has compelled us to enter this conflict? This is our comfort: that the Prince of Peace himself said that he had not come to bring peace on earth, but a sword, and that the Word of God also contains a pronouncement of woe that would strike us if we were to say, “Peace,