# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1857_S335
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— Page 335 —

...he had been refuted from Revelation itself, in that it was shown
that, apart from chiliasm's violating the analogy of faith, not the
slightest support for it could rightly be drawn from Revelation
itself either. The Synod, they said, had not even made use of the
right that theologians of the 16th and 17th centuries always claimed
without being suspected over it. Johann Gerhard, who personally
accepted the canonicity of Revelation and defended it with many
arguments, nevertheless says in his writing against chiliasm: "Since,
however, in the early Church the author of this book was for a time
doubted by some, we therefore count it among the canonical books of
the second order — not, to be sure, that we wish to strip it of
canonical authority, nor that we simply equate it in every respect
with the other canonical books over which no doubt has ever been
raised, but that we demand, with full right, that this book's
interpretation be conducted so that it in no way conflicts with the
canonical books of the first order." How, then, did it come about
that — when we have not gone even that far, indeed have given not the
slightest occasion for it — such a baseless and mendacious outcry
should be raised against the Synod, one bound to present us, in the
eyes of many, as despisers and blasphemers of the divine Word? We
live in a time when everything once settled is being stirred up
again. How wretched, though, is the conduct of people who use this
against us in order to draw simple hearts over to their conviction,
calling out to them: Look, dear people, our cause is so firmly and
irrefutably grounded in God's Word that our opponents must throw away
the Word of God itself. This is how Pastor Schieferdecker had acted,
in that he cast this firebrand into the Church not only in his own
congregation and from his own pulpit, but also in other congregations
and from other pulpits.

Pastor Schieferdecker sought to justify his conduct on the ground
that the article by Pastor Röbbelen published in "Der Lutheraner" had
provoked, within the congregations, not only doubts about the
canonicity of Revelation but also disputes, indeed frivolous talk.

Against this it was testified to him by the pastor and the deputy of
the Frohna congregation, as well as by the deputy of the Altenburg
congregation:

1. that Luther's statements on Revelation had already appeared in
"Der Lutheraner" half a year earlier, without the slightest stir
arising over them in the congregations. This was all the more
natural, since

2. old Lutheran Bibles had long been in wide use within the
congregations, so that people were already well acquainted with the
arguments raised against the canonicity of Revelation.

3. Only since the Synod declared itself against chiliasm had zeal for
this book's canonicity been put forward, in order to stir up feeling
against the Synod and its pronouncement against chiliasm. It was
precisely through the sermon (partly read out to the Synod) that the
uproar in the congregations was kindled, and the orthodox members of
the congregations were brought into the greatest distress, being
reproached for rejecting God's Word along with Luther and Pastor
Röbbelen. This, they said, called the whole work of the Reformation
into question; for if Luther — just as the Jesuits had once raised
such shameful outcry against him — could so easily