# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_Juli 1857_S219
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Church and Contemporary History. 219

...been called to Jena — as though its rationalistic theological faculty were not enough — yet another professor of philosophy, one who pays homage to the most avowed pantheism and atheism and esteems the cross no higher than the crescent: Dr. Kuno Fischer, author of the History of Modern Philosophy (cf. part 1, p. 215; part 2, pp. 421, 22.). Let us be glad that this worldly-wise man, who hates the wisdom from above and is equipped with smooth speech, has mounted the lecturer's chair in Jena, where there may not be much more left to destroy, and not in Berlin.. The students of theology from abroad avoid Jena more and more (they have withdrawn from there down to some 30) and only compulsion can protect the lecture halls of the Jena theologians, and likewise those of the Giessen theologians, from complete desolation. This is, among other things, a proof that among students of theology there is now more sound reason than formerly. For that alone must already teach that a future servant of the church acts absurdly if he seeks out seats of rationalism and deliberately lets himself be seduced away from the faith which he intends to preach.

"Unionist" justice. Professor Schenkel writes in his tract "For Bunsen against Stahl," in which he sets himself the aim of standing up for religious freedom, among other things the following: "So much is certain, that even on the standpoint of unconditional freedom of conscience only those religious bodies can lay claim to recognition which do not act against the laws of the state and whose ministers wait until their affairs have been regulated by the law of the state." (Page 44.) That is the theory of "unionist" heralds of freedom, by which they contrive to drive the odious "Formula-of-Concord sect" from their liberal tables with dog whips and yet brilliantly preserve the reputation of broad-mindedness. Certainly a feat of which even the slyest Jesuit would not need to be ashamed. Ströbel adds: "Professor Schenkel must really consider his fellow men more than arrant fools if he so much as attempts to sell them the juristically motivated formula of religious persecuting zeal as the ""standpoint of unconditional freedom of conscience."" That this toleration traces its descent from the Herods, the Diocletians, the Innocents, and other long-famous ancestors who, standing ""on the standpoint of unconditional freedom of conscience,"" demanded of the ""Lutheran"" sectarians of their day nothing further than that they ""wait"" until their religio illicita had obtained the police placet, and who were compelled to proceed against a Stephen, a James, an Ignatius, a Hus, and similar disturbers of the peace only because these proclaimed the gospel of Christ before ""their affairs had been regulated by the law of the state,"" and in part moreover stubbornly appealed, against all amicable means and ways — especially against the most liberally offered certificates of sacrifice and incense, interim religions, and the like — to their alleged conscience which insisted on being merely Lutheran, by which appeal they plainly ""acted against the laws of the state"" and forfeited every ""claim to recognition."" — Similarly to Schenkel, Herr Bunsen writes in his "Signs of the Times": "Toleration for everything, even for the intolerant, but not for the principled intolerance of the exclusive." (II, 249.) To this Ströbel makes the right remark: "Unfortunately, however, ""intolerance"" does not fly about in the air like locusts, but sticks in the ""intolerant"" and is inseparable from them; hence the question keeps recurring: is it to be tolerated along with the intolerant, or are they to be persecuted along with it? — The whole Bunsenian toleration, freedom of conscience, and religious freedom, together with the whole Schenkelian sort, could be carried off by a fly on its tail — no, the fly does not carry it off, because in this point there is nothing at all with these gentlemen that can be carried off."

Lauenburg. As we see from the Evangelische Kirchenzeitung, the enemy is now at last directing his more seriously intended attacks against the church of this little land as well. "The Lauenburg church," we read there in accordance with the truth, "has by God's grace goods which it will not let be taken from it or impaired. It has a church order,