# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_November 1864_S345
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

On the General-Synodist Confession concerning the Augsburg Confession, etc. 345

should be, which is the genus in the commandment; the other is the ceremonial part, which concerned only the Israelites, namely that the seventh day specifically should be observed, which is the species in the commandment. That first part, then, the genus, could not be abolished, but the other, the species concerning the seventh day, was abolished. In this he does not at all depart from Luther's view, and just as little, as is well known, did Heshusius, Brentius, Chemnitius, and others think differently from him. Every institution for divine worship by a positive law necessarily divides into the purpose, namely the worship to be furthered, and the means to it, which in the case of the Sabbath was ceremonial. But this is not the same thing as assuming two positive laws, one concerning the seventh day and one concerning one day out of seven." (Part II, p. 1428-1458.)

(Conclusion to follow.)

(Translated for L. u. W. by Prof. Crämer.)

On the General-Synodist Confession concerning the Augsburg Confession, "insofar as it correctly sets forth the fundamental doctrines."

What we have always testified to the General Synod concerning its limited confession to our precious Augsburg Confession, and what it has never accepted from our mouth, as that of outsiders, it must now be told by its own people in what follows, which we take from the number of the "Lutheran & Missionary" of September 29; and to the Lord be praise and thanks that he has awakened such voices in their midst, and would to God that the General Synod would at last finally listen to them. This true and decided testimony reads as follows: "If it is necessary for a Christian communion that its members agree as to what is fundamental in Christianity, since the Christian rule of faith is itself a testimony to this, then it is necessary for a Lutheran communion that its members agree as to what is fundamental in Lutheranism, since the Lutheran confession of faith is itself a testimony to this. The Unitarian and the Trinitarian likewise claim to be Christians; the Unitarian insists that the point on which they differ is purely speculative, that even granting the Trinitarian theory to be correct, it concerns a theological subtlety, a non-fundamental point, and that Unitarians and Trinitarians therefore stand in Christian unity. This the Trinitarian utterly denies; but were he to allow the Unitarian to define the word "fundamental," he would deny it in vain. The Socinian, the Universalist, the Jew, the Muhammadan can subscribe to the Apostles' Creed insofar as it concerns the fundamental doctrines, provided it is assumed that the Creed is not meant to set forth only fundamental doctrines, and provided everyone is free to determine for himself what is fundamental. No one will