# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_April 1864_S128
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

128 Church and Contemporary History.

Retraction of a Chiliast. Pastor W. Flörke has had a statement inserted in the theological journal of Dieckhoff and Kliefoth, in the November-December issue of last year, in which, among other things, it says: "I have attempted to set forth a positive doctrine of the millennium, and find myself compelled hereby to withdraw it again, apart of course from its subsidiary thoughts. The governing thought of this attempt was that of a necessary realization of the law through the church — a thought which I must consider not merely mistaken but also dangerous. I must consider it downright dangerous to assume, already in this present age, a legal perfection of the church which could coordinate itself with that of the Lord and thus claim for itself a stage of the kingdom of God all its own. That contradicts my most heartfelt, long-held basic view" (that does not say much; it would sound better to say: the clear Word of God), "and as it has therefore become a necessity to retract that positive doctrine, which thus could only produce utter obscurity, as plainly as possible (?), I can also only sincerely wish and pray that the possible effects of my little book may be checked and hindered by that same grace of which, after all, we can only ever avail ourselves everywhere, when we consider the consequences of our own nature." (We must confess that this euphemism for the fruits of our inherited corruption, for blindness and sin, strikes us as poor form in a confession of retraction.) "I thus withdraw from the ranks of the millenarians, though it goes without saying that I do not thereby withdraw from those exegetical results which I believe I have found regarding the disposition of the Apocalypse, in opposition to the Hofmannian group-theology, nor therefore from the conclusion that the thousand years of the Apocalypse still fall within this present life and for that very reason require some lapse of time. This I know from Scripture today as I did yesterday; but what that lapse of time holds within it, and whether any historical development within it is even possible at all, of that I know not the least." However gratifying this retraction may be on the one hand, it would please us better still if it were simpler, and contained nothing but the renunciation of the error. Pastor Flörke must now see with horror that his chiliastic presumptions had led him into teaching a future form of the church that would abolish the Gospel altogether; this should therefore also convince him, not only what a dangerous poison for the soul chiliasm is, but also how little he is called to seek the key of the Apocalypse for Christendom, and that it would befit him, in the first place, to lay his hand upon his mouth in deepest humility. A falsification of the doctrine of the Word of God is no joke; it demands true repentance.

Pastor Hofmeier in Straupitz was last year finally removed from his office by the higher authority of the United state church of Prussia, because he refused to introduce the congregational church council as the first cornerstone for the formation of a United synod — on the ground that this was none of his congregation's concern, since it was not United — and because he demanded recognition of his congregation as a Lutheran one that had not joined the Union. He has since found another position as pastor in Alt-Rehse in Mecklenburg.

Lutherans. Even Dr. Wangemann says, in this year's preface to his monthly paper: "The name 'Lutheran,' among those who bear it today, covers many heterodoxies and inner contradictions, far more than one supposes. If one were to sort out, from the number of those who call themselves Lutheran, first those who have not even studied Luther's writings thoroughly, and second those who no longer really stand, even on all the main points, on the Lutheran churchly confession, an astonishingly small little band would be left over. And this band is, moreover, weakened by so many private feuds among its members." We add only this: and if there are many who have indeed studied Luther's writings along with Dr. Wangemann, but who nevertheless, together with him, reject Luther's testimony as unbiblical precisely on the burning questions of the present day, then the little band grows smaller still.

Prussian Lutheran Church. Pastor Brunn writes to us concerning its present state, under date of Feb. 22, among other things, as follows: "In our Prussian church controversy a decisive event has occurred. Huschke of Breslau has set forth his teaching in a learned and detailed treatise. In it he has not only laid bare his error quite nakedly and crudely, carrying it through to its consequences, but he also comes forward on its behalf so boldly, with the claim of symbolic standing and exclusive right within the church, that no indecision on the matter is any longer possible. It stands firm for all of us that a decision on this must be reached at the next General Synod (in the fall of this year). Huschke himself insists on it, claiming the exclusive symbolic authority of his teaching. What is now at stake is whether, even in our German Lutheran church, the pure Lutheran confession still finds a place, or whether, rather, a false Lutheranism is more and more soaring upward to victory and dominion. Help us by fighting and praying that the Lord may not let his precious church be robbed of its lampstand."