# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1882_S41
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 41 —

perhaps even the highwayman himself, and says: You have done me the same grievous wrong as I have done you and wanted to do — would there not arise great laughter at such critics? How, then, can one reproach us with having defended ourselves? We would never have done so if we had not first been publicly branded for a whole year, so that now our name and our papers stink in the whole world, in Germany, in the East Indies, Australia and Africa. How can one now regard us as wretched fanatics if one does not simply extend the hand of brotherhood to such people, who first trampled us like a worm into the dust, and now pose as if they had muddied no little stream? So the wretched Zwingli also posed toward Luther, whereupon Luther told the beautiful fable of the wolf and the sheep, where the wolf stands above and the sheep below at the brook, and yet the wolf claimed that the sheep made the water muddy for him.

A delegate who formerly belonged to the Grabau Synod [Buffalo Synod] also testified that he had had opportunity enough to learn the difference in Missouri's polemic. The Missourians distinguish whether the one who writes against them is still a brother. Against such a one they never come out with such language as, e.g., against a Methodist enthusiast or against the open pseudo-Lutherans. With the latter one must speak a stronger language.

Note this also, that the delegates of the Wisconsin Synod, on submitting their protest, reported incidentally that Prof. Schmidt had boasted in their congregation at Oshkosh: he was also still a member of the Synodical Conference. And thereupon he agitated in the congregation. Suppose the case: A pastor in the Wisconsin Synod became manifest as a fanatic, and a part of his congregation, which stands right, called a Missouri professor to help — what would the Missourians have done? Anyone, if he is still one with the Missouri Synod in the doctrine of church and ministry and the practice relating to it, would not have come to the help of the orthodox part of the congregation, but would have referred it to its Synod and, if this had not helped it, would have urged it to keep to the proper course of appeal up to the Synodical Conference.

Yes! if a Roman priest acts as Prof. Schmidt does, since he recognizes no preaching office outside the sole-saving Roman church, that would at least be natural and reasonable. But that a man, while he boasts: I belong to the Synodical Conference, acts so, thereby designates himself as a fratricide. In the same position now as the Wisconsin Synod is the Synod of Minnesota. It came out much less against Schmidt in the fight, and yet he has treated it just as shabbily, after it had made a confession of its doctrine of election.