# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1876_S21
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 21 —

one calls the Church Fathers, namely with those who were nearest to the time of the Apostles, agrees. . . . The third is the symbolical, by virtue of which we accept, in general agreement, the doctrine contained in the symbolical books of our Church, in the Augsburg Confession, in its Apology, in the two Catechisms of Luther, in the Smalcald Articles and in the Formula of Concord; if, therefore, anyone refuses to profess himself to the same, we by no means acknowledge him as a brother in respect of faith and confession." (Loc. de eccles. § 246.)

With the Unionists this unity is lacking, especially the last, and with it of course also the two preceding. How can a Lutheran pastor say, then, that he wants to be a member of the *Synodalconferenz* [Synodical Conference] and stands as such a member upon the full Lutheran confession, and yet wants at the same time to be pastor of a congregation that rejects this! Such a congregation he cannot serve in truth. For he must refuse it the Holy Supper, because it professes false doctrine and holds fast to it. The misery of not being able to give the Holy Supper to the true Christians among the heterodox is not due to us, but has broken in through the sects. The devil has succeeded, by false doctrine, in erecting a partition wall among Christians. Sad as that is, a preacher of a heterodox congregation must nevertheless, even if true Christians are found among it, refuse the pasture; he may not say to it: You are my sheep and I am your shepherd; he will have to refuse it the Holy Supper, he cannot for a moment acknowledge the heterodox as his brothers and so make Union in fact, or he acts in such a case against God's Word, which says in 2 John 10, 11: "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds." We too have to direct ourselves by this in the nineteenth century. We cannot go beyond God's Word.

According to our confessional writings not even such church ceremonies are to be tolerated through which it would gain the appearance that there is no difference in doctrine between us and other church communions. For so it says in the 10th article of the

Formula of Concord: "Nor are such ceremonies to be counted among the true free adiaphora or things indifferent which have the appearance, or, in order to avoid persecution, are meant to feign the appearance, as if our religion were not far removed from the papistic, or as if it were not highly opposed to us, or if such ceremonies are so meant, so demanded, or" (nevertheless) "adopted" (are), "as if thereby and through them both adverse religions were reconciled