# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1875_S14
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 14 —

we at first the confession of the General Council, but hardly was it adopted when it was denied again by the practice.

True, it is not especially emphasized in this thesis that we cannot recognize such church bodies, for we are not now dealing with the church but with church fellowship. The General Council does not seek recognition from us at all; it knows our position well and makes bitter complaint about it. A special declaration is therefore superfluous in our thesis. It is the special task of those of our pastors who come into contact with the General Council. But since the Synodical Conference [*Synodal⸗Conferenz*] holds a prominent position, and the public papers of the Council, which are read everywhere, complain about our refusal to acknowledge the Council as truly Lutheran, a continuing testimony against the Council is necessary: partly to rebuke the dishonest conduct, partly to strengthen the members of the Council who are fighting for the truth, partly also to encourage our own congregations which have to struggle with the Council. Moreover the leaders of the Iowans have recently declared that it would be godlessness to separate from the General Council. The *Nominalelenchus* [naming of names in refutation] is also necessary again and again in our testimony, because one should rebuke, refute and warn against not only the sin and error of the false teachers but also the bearers of the false doctrines themselves, naming them by name.

Thesis 8.

This contradiction can occur in several ways. It occurs first when a Lutheran church body, which expressly and emphatically professes the symbolical books, nevertheless tolerates, or even approves and endorses, pulpit exchange with non-Lutheran preachers and altar fellowship with non-Lutherans within its fellowship, and does not oppose every form of chiliasm decisively.

By non-Lutherans are to be understood not merely the erring sects, but also all those who do acknowledge the correctness of our doctrine but do not reject false doctrine and are unwilling to leave the church bodies of false belief. If such members of churches of false belief come to our Lord's Supper, they are to be instructed about the difference of doctrine and the errors of their false churches. If they acknowledge the scriptural character of our doctrine, but do not at the same time reject error and do not renounce their fellowship of false belief, it is evident that they are mired in unionism; therefore, until they have renounced the false doctrine and false fellowship, they are to be turned away from the Holy Supper. Only danger of death makes an exception here; then a confession of the truth would suffice, if there is no stubborn clinging to error. But to others it would