# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1875_S23
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 23 —

4. concerning the Last Day (in that chiliasm teaches that the Last Day cannot come at any moment).

Of the practice of the Lutheran church with regard to chiliasts the following examples testify: When the Lutheran preacher Heinrich Ammersbach in Halberstadt came forward with chiliasm, the Lutheran faculty at Rinteln, on being asked, gave in the year 1666 the following opinion: "It has long since been sufficiently shown by the evangelical theologians that such an opinion of the chiliasts is not at all to be admitted, nor can it be proved from the 20th chapter of the Revelation of John. As this opinion is rightly rejected, and care must be taken that our evangelical churches are not disturbed by it, especially since in the 17th Article of the Augsburg Confession these plain words stand: Likewise, here are rejected certain Jewish teachings which are also arising now, that before the resurrection of the dead only saints, the pious, will have a worldly kingdom and will exterminate all the godless —: so we are no less astonished that the aforementioned author (Ammersbach), though he is a preacher at Halberstadt, is not ashamed to attack our theologians, who have until now steadfastly rejected the chiliasts, in such a scornful manner and, on the other hand, to praise Seidenbecher's doctrine. We therefore report as our legal opinion that the aforesaid author is to be asked whether he intends to persist in what he has ventured to defend in a public writing, or to publicly renounce such erroneous opinions (to abjure them with recantation). If he should choose the first and refuse the second, he would indeed not at once be condemned as a heretic, but yet not to be tolerated in the church office. If, after the deposition has taken place, the author should not cease to disturb the simple with his fanaticism, the fiscal (the public prosecutor) would have to bring charges against him, and further proceedings would be ordered as is lawful." Likewise, on account of chiliasm there were deposed in the year 1661 G. Laur. Seidenbecher in Saxony, in the year 1684 T. T. Zimmermann in Württemberg, in the year 1665 Friedrich Breckling in Zwolle in Holland, in the year 1639 Adolph Held in Stade in the Hanoverian territory, in the year 1724 Stier in Veclau in Hesse, in the year 1669 Jacob Taube at Arnhem in Holland; J. David Schäfer in Franconia anticipated his deposition in 1725 by resignation. In the matter of Seidenbecher, J. E. Gerhard and J. Musäus declared in a requested opinion: "In case Seidenbecher should persist, in such obstinacy, even at a single last summons, we hold, in accordance with God's Word, the oath of religion and the practice usual in our churches, that he be removed from his teaching and preaching office."

To the question why the most subtle chiliasts are not excluded from church fellowship, when every chiliasm [is contrary] to the confession