# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_November 1862_S325
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

A Brotherly Greeting from Germany, by Fr. Brunn. 325

No less mistaken is the party of the Supreme Church Council (Oberkirchencollegium) in Breslau. It likewise acknowledges, to be sure, that the church is by its essence the congregation of believers, the body of Christ; but it will make absolutely no distinction between visible and invisible church, regarding visibility and invisibility only as two different sides of one and the same thing, and wishes to distinguish only thus: according to its one, heavenly side, the church is nothing other than the pure spiritual congregation of believers; but this congregation also has an earthly, human side, according to which it has a visible form on earth, forming an earthly, visible, social organism. And this organism, with its joints and members — to which also belong church order, church government, etc. — is likewise divinely instituted for the church, and is thus, in this sense too, an essential part of its existence on earth. — This theory of a visible organism instituted for the church, with a divinely authorized church government, is without doubt, and with full right, rejected most stubbornly by the opposing party as a piece of intolerable legalism and as an open door for every possible kind of papacy in the church. For who else could then fault the Roman pope, if he likewise wished to assert his claim to be a member of the visible, external organism instituted for the church?

Between these two extreme parties in our Prussian Lutheran church there is found, thank God, still a not insignificant host in the middle, whose representative may be regarded as the old, dear church councilor Ehlers, the former editor of the Lutheran Kirchenblatt. With determination, Ehlers, together with those of like mind with him, has come out against the Breslau doctrine of the external ecclesiastical organism and church government; yet, on the other side, Ehlers has so far still lacked an equally clear and definite opposition to the one-sidedness of the Dietrich direction, although it is to be hoped that he does not really share it.

The parties in Prussia still stand, up to now, entirely unreconciled, facing one another. A conference recently held in Berlin, like the previous year's General Synod in Breslau, has served only to work out the oppositions quite starkly and clearly and to set them over against one another, but not to reconcile them or to bring the truth to victory. The pastors Dietrich, Räthjen, and Wolf have for the time being renounced the Breslau synodal constitution and the jurisdiction of the O. K. College. I withhold all judgment on this step, concerning which, as one may easily imagine, a great deal is said for and against. Yet it does not appear that, for the present, many more will follow their example.*) I cherish the firm confidence that the majority, out of sincere and pure truth-

*) Readers must not overlook that the present address was written down nearly a year ago already, and that since then much has changed and in part become more sharply pronounced. The Editors.