# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_August 1862_S249
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Literary Notices. 249

him at the end of last year from his office, with the prohibition against
undertaking any official acts whatsoever.

The church council could hardly have acted otherwise in its position, and
if everything else had stood right with it, one could have no hesitation in
taking its side. But that not everything stood right is, unfortunately,
sufficiently evident from this investigation. When the church council
proceeded against Vollert's offenses, he in all modesty took the liberty of
setting the offenses of the church council and the confusion within the
territorial church over against them. Some points have already been
mentioned. Vollert lists the whole series of offenses in a special
document addressed to the church council, in order to induce it to explain
what kind of church the territorial church is, and what rightly exists
within it. According to this document, whose statements the church council
has tacitly acknowledged, the obligation of preachers to the confessional
writings has, since 1817, been only a conditional one, insofar as they
agree with God's Word — that is, actually abolished. In 1818 a union took
place in the court church, which the congregation at Eisenach later
followed. Both unionized congregations, together with the Reformed, are
incorporated into the territorial church and stand under one and the same
church council, which counts unionist members. Accordingly, in appointing
teachers and preachers, no regard is paid to the confessional standing of
the congregations. Reformed men come to Lutheran positions, Lutherans to
unionist ones. In 1852 the church council therefore expressly declared
itself for the Union in a decree, and declared the differences of the
confessions not to be church-dividing.

Now as to what kind of union is meant after the setting-aside of the
confessions, there are facts that speak loudly, or rather cry out. It is
the union of indifference and of doctrinal freedom. To this day the name
of church councilor Dr. Dittenberger stands foremost among the
contributors to the Protestant (rationalist) Kirchenzeitung. Pastor
Steinacker, who was refused a position in Hanover on account of his
shameless unbelief, has found an honorable reception and appointment in
the Weimar territory. Like him, there are still many others in the land who
can teach whatever they wish, only not like Vollert, and they are dear
fellows. For there is talk neither of doctrinal nor of moral discipline,
since the latter is precisely not in season with those who declare the
practice and cultivation of virtue to be the first and last main article of
religion. But doctrinal discipline cannot be exercised where doctrine is
free. It must further be added that recently, by order of the church
government, a public church collection was arranged in support of building
a Jewish synagogue. The Jewish community has publicly given thanks for
this proof of enlightenment, and has thereby given the church council
testimony of its faith and of its Union.

What, then, is the Weimar territorial church? The church council answers:
the Lutheran Church still exists rightfully within it; where, and in what
manner, it does not say. For in fact the territorial church, as such, is the church