# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1882_S71
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

— 71 —

so understood. Perhaps I am mistaken. But I have not found Confession and Catechism in the Bible; unless a new text had been discovered on Sinai or elsewhere. It has at least been my opinion that the Confession was drawn up by the Fathers. — Moreover, when there is talk of the good in man as a cause of the so-called election of grace, it depends on the expression what one understands by it. That something good in man is the ground and cause of election is God's 'voluntas consequens' (the consequent will of God), which moves Him afterwards to make this discrimination among men. All the dogmaticians whom I have seen teach this. And Holy Scripture teaches it too, and sets the works also as a cause why God distinguishes among men and appoints some men to heaven and some to hell. That is the teaching of Scripture. When one teaches about the election of grace and the universal counsel of salvation, one must distinguish the two. When one speaks of the order of salvation, it is certainly true that there is nothing good in man except perhaps sin, which moved God to ordain an order of salvation for men. In that, as far as I know, the Lutheran teachers are agreed. — Now, we have been thrown into this controversy without theses or preparation. I do not think that this is the way in which one can best arrive at a solution of this question that could satisfy the conscience. For consciences, when they are bound, must be loosed by God's Word. But since this question has now arisen, I wished to give my slight testimony according to my slight ability."

To this a member of the Conference replied as follows: "Only a few words. Pastor Muus indeed disclaims that he wishes to make the dogmaticians the source of truth and their dogmatics the touchstone. But his whole line of proof speaks against him. Why does he not begin with the Word of God and the Confession and try to prove from them that we are in error? No, he tries to prove to us that we are certainly mistaken, for we would have the three-hundred-year consensus of the Fathers against us. Even if that were true, as it is not, it would be quite unLutheran to want to ensnare our consciences by calling out to us: Fathers! Fathers! Even if they all have the 'intuitu fidei' in the 17th century, one explains it in one way, another in another. It became fashionable, so to speak, some time after the appearance of the Formula of Concord to use the word. It was even expected of everyone, if he was to be considered orthodox, that he have the expression. But what does it help Pastor Muus that they all use the word? There is a whole host of interpretations of it. But, as said, we do not let ourselves be ensnared by the dogmaticians; they bind our consciences here no more than in the doctrine of the Sabbath and of the power of the civil authority in ecclesiastical matters. There one has