# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_November 1858_S324
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

324 Ströbel and “Lehre und Wehre.”

-isions had arisen in the pure Evangelical churches. Was it, then, not
contrary to the spirit of the Lutheran church at that time, when, for the
purpose of removing the disunity that had arisen over the true
understanding of the Augsburg Confession, one not only bore witness to
the truth in writing, but also held conventions, colloquies, and
conferences — should it, then, not likewise now be contrary to the
spirit of our church to hold similar conferences for the same purpose?
Indeed, we must confess we can hardly conceive of anything less Lutheran
than wanting to burden a Lutheran's conscience over such an adiaphoron.
It is, of course, true that wanting to help the church by all manner of
human means — by grandiose demonstrations, by effect-chasing speeches,
by transactions and compromises with the enemies of pure doctrine, by
outward confederations against a common enemy while inward difference
in faith remains, and the like — is idolatrous human contrivance. But
to come together in order to read the confession of the church in
common, to come to an understanding and agreement about its true sense,
and to strengthen one another in the faith of the saving truth confessed
therein — that, far from being a self-chosen way of man reaching into
God's governance, is rather an inalienable Christian right, indeed, in
our firmest conviction, in a time such as ours and in circumstances such
as those here, a holy Christian duty. To make this a sin is in any case
an attack on our precious Christian liberty, which we will never allow
to be taken from us, no matter what camp the attack comes from. Is it
right to write about the true sense of a churchly confession that has
often been twisted, misinterpreted, and misunderstood, yet where should
the wrong lie in also speaking of it? Is that not a wanting to do for
oneself what God wants to do, since God governs his church precisely
through the Word — why should this be different? Is not the written
word and the spoken word one and the same Word? Ströbel indeed
exclaims: “What running and hurrying, what notices, reports, proposals
“concerning the subjects, form, time, place, etc.,” what mighty
over-busyness through the whole volume of 1856!” But here Ströbel
plainly uses only the appearance he has himself created, in order to
make odious a matter against which he is prejudiced. Or would it
document a “mighty over-busyness” if, concerning a conference to be
held, as the nature of the matter itself entails, a few numbers of a
periodical first carried a few “notices, inquiries, reports, and
proposals”? Since the holding of the first conference we have, up to
this hour, spoken a few words about it perhaps two or three times; is
that “mighty over-busyness”? If so, then this reproach truly hits
Luther more than us, when we think of the many letters he wrote, by
which that conference was once introduced which had the Wittenberg
Concord as its result. When Ströbel, finally, writes concerning our
conference: “Would that