# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1884_S41
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

of the Ev. Luth. Synodical Conference of North America. 1884. 39

from the Confession, but have fetched solely from the private writings of human teachers, we must say: they do not stand herein on the ground of Scripture, their doctrine and their faith of election is rather built on men. No protesting helps.

Unfortunately, in the orthodox Church too, a perverse, parrot-like way has at all times been found among individuals. One held to this or that great teacher. So long as this related to what was right, it may well not have done particularly great harm, although by its kind and nature it was and is always something highly dangerous. Incidentally, we do not deny that there have been among us also people, and good simple people, and perhaps still are, who say simply in their defense: It stands, after all, in the Western District Proceedings; or if it is demanded that this or that point of doctrine be proved, one may well also hear: It stands, after all, in Walther's Pastorale. To be sure, this happens as a rule only out of simplicity, without one's wanting to set human writings beside, or even above, Holy Scripture, but papistic, dangerous and harmful to faith it is and remains, wherefore we cannot take a stand against it among us earnestly enough. Among the Ohioans this adoring way has grown up on a false ground and soil and is there positively cultivated and nursed. They jingle and rattle the Fathers around people's noses. If one says: Do you then mean to prove the correctness of your doctrine with the Fathers? they are capable of calling out to us: "Get thee behind me, Satan! the Bible alone is the golden ground on which we stand. Who will prove a doctrine with the Fathers?" But though they talk so: if anyone lets himself be pleased with them, they rattle the Fathers at him until he is anxious and afraid. They do this continually. They positively frighten people with Gerhard, Hunnius, etc., so that timid minds do not dare at all to ask: But is not this expression, this doctrine, wrong? One dares it at most when one can hold up other and, if possible, still greater authorities against it. As Ohio, so, as is well known, does Prof. Schmidt also.

Consider only how he did it again lately in the Norwegian Synod. He knew that Pantoppidan (who died in 1767) is the darling of the Norwegians. Therefore he proposed that the Norwegian Synod also should confess that it agrees with the manner in which Pantoppidan sets forth the doctrine of election. Thus he, too, wanted to misuse the piety of the people toward a man to lead them to his (Schmidt's) false doctrine, without his succeeding, however, in moving the whole synod to that confession. He should, as a true Christian, have said: You know, to be sure, that Pantoppidan stands on my side in the doctrine of election; but that decides nothing; we must go into the Bible.