# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1848 05 24_S165
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

...feels sin more strongly — indeed, when God lets loose the conscience, the Law, and Satan against him, in order to test his faith.

2. He never counts himself worthy of the comfort of grace and of faith, whether he feels sin strongly or weakly, since he knows that even the weakest and faintest stirring of faith in the Lord Christ is the free and unmerited grace of God and the sole work of the Holy Spirit, who likewise works beforehand this weaker or stronger recognizing, repenting, and confessing of sin (repentance).

3. He never complains of, nor is astonished at, newly discovered black blemishes of the heart, since he knows from Scripture that by nature, from head to foot, he is nothing but a sinner in Adam, of and by himself.

4. and 5. In himself he is and remains the same poor sinner in Adam, even when joy and delight are upon his head and blessing rains down upon him in streams. But he is and remains likewise the same righteous one in Christ, when tribulation, anguish, nakedness, hunger, peril, sword — yes, death, hell, and the devil — storm against him.

6. He seeks the ground and source of this true state of grace and faith, and his blessedness, never in himself, but outside himself, namely: a) in the divine counsel of his eternal election of grace in Christ before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4; 2 Tim. 1:9); b) in the divine execution of this counsel, when the time was fulfilled, that is, in the incarnation of the Son of God and his alone-meritorious life, suffering, and death, as well as in his glorious resurrection, which testifies to his vicarious satisfaction and reconciliation for the sin of the whole world (Gal. 4:4–5; 1 John 2:1–2); c) in his personal calling through the preaching of the Gospel and his engrafting into Christ through Holy Baptism, by the power of the grace of the Holy Spirit, who alone also works faith in him — the faith that lays hold of the grace of God and the merit of Christ in these means of grace (Rom. 8:28–30; Acts 2:37–38; John 6:29).

Second Dialogue.
The Doctrine and Manner of the Methodists.

Philipp. You said recently that Methodist doctrine and practice cannot produce and build up sound, well-grounded Christians, but at best can only wholesomely awaken and startle them out of the sleep of sin, and bring the firstfruits of God's grace in Christ, and of faith in him, into the heart by the way of feeling. Now you owe me the proof of it.

Martin. With God's help I intend to give it to you. Have you ever had before your eyes the little book "Doctrine and Discipline of the Episcopal Methodists," published in English by the General Conference and translated from it into German, Cincinnati 1841?

Philipp. No!

Martin. Well, this little pocket-format book, which I happen to have with me here, consists of 212 pages — and how many of these, would you suppose, are devoted to "the doctrine"?

Philipp. Well, I should think more than half; for even though I am no scholar, I can see this much: that confession and doctrine are the first and most important part in any particular church; for if this is false or erroneous, then on the whole its worship, life, and constitution must necessarily also be false and erroneous; but if that part is pure and sound, then at least these other parts can also be pure and sound — and it is not the fault of the doctrine if they are not.

Martin. There you are quite right, dear Philipp, and I see you are shrewder than many a scholar who cannot see the forest for all the trees.

But let us stay with the matter. Listen, and be a little astonished! Of those 212 little pages, only 12 fall to poor "doctrine," while 200 fall to "church order." From this alone you can already tell what value the Methodists place on doctrine, and what value they place on their particular discipline and constitution. So they hardly seem to share your opinion, friend Philipp, and do not hold doctrine to be the foremost part. But should that trouble you, I will comfort you with the apostle Paul. He was certainly of your opinion! For the greater part of all his epistles consists of doctrine — partly in a simple exposition of it, as for example in the Epistle to the Romans, partly in defense against and combating, for example, the Jewish teachers and champions of the Law among the Galatians, who, at the expense of the Gospel and the sole merit of Christ, loaded upon them the law of circumcision in order to be saved, much as enthusiastic Methodists load the anxious bench upon the poor people for the same purpose. Likewise the apostle shows what value he places on doctrine when he rebukes the secret teachers and enthusiasts among the Colossians, and, conversely, also teaches very fully and carefully, in Rom. 14–15 and 1 Cor. 8–10, the nature of true evangelical freedom, while at the same time warning against fleshly abuse of it. But the words of discipline and admonition which he partly scatters in among the doctrine, and partly speaks in the closing chapters as a father in Christ, are very few compared with the words of testimony and doctrine; indeed, even in his so-called pastoral epistles — that is, in the letters to Timothy and Titus, his helpers — in which he is most detailed about the constitution and discipline of the church, he still always lays the chief emphasis on the purity of doctrine, partly for the founding of the congregations, partly in defense against false teachers (see, e.g., 2 Tim. 1:13; 3:14; 1 Tim. 6:3; Titus 2:1). You see, then, my Philipp: if we hold confession and doctrine to be the foremost part, as our church indeed does, we have the apostle Paul on our side, against those 12 little pages of "doctrine" and 200 little pages of "church order."

Philipp. Is there, then, any mention of a definite confession — and is the unanimity and unity of faith with the apostolic church attested, say, by the verbatim adoption of the ancient creed of the church in the Apostles' Creed and its two most important expansions in the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds? So, at least, did our church fathers and reformers do, in that these universally recognized testimonies of the Christian church precede the Augsburg Confession.

Martin. Wherever do you get such notions? Why, then the far more important church order would have had at least 6 fewer little pages, thus only 194. Besides, the Methodists are, as is well known, the city set on a hill, which is seen — and heard — from afar; why then should they be so anxious and concerned to demonstrate, by way of a confession, their connection and their unanimity with the original evangelical-apostolic church?

Philipp. I understand your jesting earnestness well enough. But now show me why Methodist doctrine and practice cannot form sound and well-grounded Christians.

Martin. Let us first look at the doctrine, namely the written doctrine on those 12 little pages. There we find the following defects:

1. Besides that unchurchly and unhistorical omission of the original confession, several important articles of the doctrine of salvation are missing — such as, for example, the article on the ministry of preaching (instituted and ordained by the Lord, according to Acts 20:28, 1 Pet. 5:2), on Law and Gospel, on repentance, on the election of grace, and others besides.

2. Some of the doctrinal articles that are present are expressed partly erroneously, partly ambiguously. Thus, for example, Article 7, "Of Original Sin," says at the end that "man has departed very far from original righteousness, and is by his own nature continually inclined to evil." Here it is not made clear what this departure is — whether a mere weakening and deficiency, or a decided contradiction of man's "original righteousness" before God; for only in the latter case would it be correct and in accordance with Scripture (Ps. 51:7; Gen. 8:21; Rom. 7:14), whereas in the former case it would be a leaning toward the Roman doctrine. Of this leaning, Article 2 indeed renders itself suspect, in saying that Christ "offered himself up as a sacrifice not only for the guilt of original sin, but also for actual sins." From this it appears that Article 7 regards that departure from original righteousness, and that constant inclination to evil, only as an involuntary hereditary defect, and not as voluntary original sin; the former, now, is the opinion of the Roman church, but the latter is what our church teaches in Article 2 of the Augsburg Confession, "Of Original Sin." There it says, "that