# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_November 1857_S352
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

352   Church and Contemporary History.

dencies of symbolism, it appeared fitting to raise the banner of orthodoxy and piety in times such as these." It is in truth a joke to hear this southern-Illinois clergy talk of "orthodoxy"; presumably history too is meant to be nothing but a joke.

The Tennessee Synod was again in session from September 26 to October 1 of this year. From the Luth. Standard we learn that on this occasion Pastor H. Wessel, in accordance with a resolution of the synod of last year, laid before the synod "Rules for the Congregations," according to which, among other things, the acknowledgment of all the symbolical books of our church is required of the congregations and their pastors. A motion to recommend these rules to the congregations called forth a lively discussion. The final resolution was that they should be appended to the synodical report without recommendation. The reporter writes: "We give notice of this for the purpose of pointing out a tendency toward symbolism making itself known in the synod. That such a party exists among us admits of no doubt. The matter has been brought before the synod in various forms at three sessions in succession. It will without doubt agitate the synod hereafter. Hitherto, in all our controversies with others as well as in our constitution, we have acknowledged only the Augsburg Confession and Luther's Small Catechism. This was the position taken by the founders of our synod with respect to doctrine, and which we have ever since held fast." — Since we have hitherto been of the opinion that the Tennessee Synod was, and still is, in earnest with the confession of the fundamental symbols of our church, it astonishes us, we confess, to learn that the said motion could meet with serious resistance in it — indeed, that voices can be raised from within it which seek to brand with the odious name "symbolism" the effort to give the synod an ever firmer confessional foundation.

The Hartwick Synod (N.Y.). After it had adopted the Platform, the so-called Franckean Synod declared that, if that had happened earlier, it would not have separated. Upon this the former now declares in its synodical report of this year: that it has adopted no new platform, but has merely confirmed anew its attachment to the doctrinal basis of the General Synod and to its own exposition of the Augsburg Confession, as the same (exposition) is contained in a pamphlet published by it in the year 1857. — Hitherto we had regarded the movement in favor of the Platform as a stirring of honesty; this resolution, we cannot suppress the remark, makes us doubt again. Or can the contents of the Platform sealed by the Hartwick Synod be called, without blushing, an "exposition of the Augustana"?

II. Abroad.

Merle d'Aubigné. From the Missionary we learn the following: On June 27 the 27th annual meeting of the Evangelical Society at Geneva was held at Geneva. In the course of the proceedings Professor Merle spoke of the importance of a theological discipline which has hitherto been cultivated almost exclusively in Germany, the history of Christian dogma. "This study," he remarked, "enables one to distinguish the fundamental doctrines of Christianity from the changing or more or less complete systems by which these truths have been expressed in various epochs. In the Christian religion there is, alongside the divine element, alongside the objective truths, a human element, and it is of importance not to belittle it. Distinguished men, such as Channing, have had a veil before their eyes which hid from them the deity of Christ. Yet in spite of this grave error they loved Christ, and one cannot say that Christ was useless to them or that He exercised no influence upon them. The like may be maintained of those who do not concede the divine authority and the inspiration of the Bible; they are not on that account inaccessible to the influence of the Bible, nor strangers to faith. The Christians of the revival period have the merit of having again loudly proclaimed and restored the activity of God in the Christian revelation and in the regeneration of the individual, but they have neglected to take into account the important human element, both in the person of the Redeemer and in the inspiration of the Scripture. The new generation is called to supply what has been omitted in this respect and to restore the equilibrium. In any case one ought not to regard oneself as bound to reproduce in slavish fashion the opinions of Calvin and of the Reformers." — One sees from this where those among the neo-believers end up who do not follow God's mighty call in our time to return to the ancient, immovable foundation of the church. They mean to stand still, but, seized by the stream of the times, they are drawn unnoticed back into the whirlpool of rationalism, whose conqueror they take themselves to be, and, while it more and more disappears, they take over its places and its position. Why could the Missionary make that communication without adding a word of warning?