# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1884_S40
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

38 Proceedings of the tenth convention

ever further from the truth, they now zeal for their error with lack of understanding, and fancy firmly and steadfastly that they are discharging the office of watchmen over the pure doctrine. But to those who are of the truth the present controversy brings only blessing. What bright light this controversy has brought about the fact that free will is nothing, what it means to be saved by faith and to be saved by grace, what it means to hope for one's salvation, etc.! How much leaven of Synergism has thereby been swept out even of those who thought themselves free of it! How much more cautiously, unambiguously and definitely to speak and write this controversy has taught us! In controversy it is simply: Take care that you say nothing which the enemy might use to hide his false doctrine behind it or to cast suspicion and slander on your truth. It is also not to be overlooked that Kromayer speaks not of heresies but only of blemishes of the Fathers. These godly men did not consciously forsake Scripture, but erred from human frailty. Therefore one should also cover the nakedness of the Fathers as far as can be done with a good conscience. That we have also done. It is true that we are reproached with having spoken quite differently of the Fathers earlier than now. But what call had we earlier to make these dear men suspect to our Lutheran Christian people, whose doctrine we first had to bring into the people? In its time we could then also say: See, dear brethren, in this and that the doctrine even of these dear teachers is not quite right. And that we have also not wholly concealed from the very beginning. We have shown, for example, that they do not teach rightly about Sunday when they say that Sunday was instituted by God and put in the place of the Jewish Sabbath.

We do not say with all this, on the other hand, that our opponents want to know nothing at all of Scripture and only something of the Fathers. For had they done that, they would at once have openly revealed themselves before the whole of Christendom as heretics. No heretic has done that, either. Neither Arius nor Pelagius, neither Zwingli nor Oecolampadius, in short no heretic, not even the Pope, says: I do not go by Scripture. Our opponents rather speak very highly of Scripture. But we ask: Whence have they the Intuitu fidei? Answer: From the Fathers and not from Scripture. Scripture they had to reinterpret afterwards, as they do, for example, in Rom. 8. While here the apostle says of God that he foreknew persons, that is, elected them, as our Confession rightly expounds this word, they say: he foresaw the faith. So they first carry faith into this passage of Scripture, and thus give their people the appearance that they too prove their doctrine from Scripture. Since they now stand firm on a doctrine which they have not from Scripture, nor