# Lehre und Wehre_St. Louis Missouri_Mai 1859_S148
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

148 On the History of American Chiliasm.

Word, he believed not merely the doctrine of a thousand-year kingdom, but would also, in due time, preach publicly about it. Since the congregation, in its present state of knowledge, was still a child, and the chief task of pastoral activity was accordingly a foundational one, he had for the time left this matter untouched in the pulpit. — To this the Senior of the Ministerium replied on Jan. 3 of this year, among other things: "You say you had your pulpit for that purpose and would preach this doctrine publicly in due time. This, however, sounds like nothing less than a private opinion, but rather like an intended declaration of war against your present Synod ... You will therefore find it fair if we advise you, instead of carrying the declared war into effect, rather to take a peaceful leave from Toledo." Dörfler, the report states, thereupon replied on Jan. 13, resigning the pastoral office in Toledo with visible vexation and resentment against his church authority. Meanwhile a letter arrived at the Senior's from seven members of the Toledo congregation, in which they spoke out against Dörfler's removal. In the letter in which Dörfler declares his wish to resign, he remarks: first, that his declaration concerning the thousand-year kingdom had not been meant as a declaration of war — he could only not let his conscience be bound to keep silent about a doctrine of Scripture that by no means ran counter to the Confession; second, that it was wrong to maintain that a Lutheran pastor might preach nothing that the confessional writings of the church did not contain; third, that upon his entry into the Buffalo Synod no obligation had been laid upon him to be silent about this doctrine;"*) fourth, that with the Augsburg Confession he rejected fanatical chiliasm, but that he accepted the biblical doctrine of Apoc. 20 concerning a glorious thousand-year kingdom heartily and in faith, and therefore (quite rightly!) could neither change his conviction nor be silent about it.

Thereupon, the report states, he was given, on Jan. 17, without any consideration of his attacks and chiliastic defenses, the requested dismissal from office in Toledo, and on January 22 and the following days a church visitation was held in Toledo by the Senior of the Ministerium and Pastors von Rohr and Maschhop. On this occasion too the latter took no opportunity to demonstrate to Mr. Dörfler his error from God's Word. "Since he," it states, "had renounced the office in Toledo in peace, it was indeed no longer our calling to dispute with him first about the falseness of chiliasm, but rather to regard him as one peacefully dismissed, who had spared us the conflict with him." One was satisfied with the fact that "the congregation

*) To be sure, Dörfler is mistaken in this, for whoever is bound to the Symbols does indeed have this obligation laid upon him; but it was certainly a mistake of false church policy that Dörfler, who was under suspicion on account of chiliasm, was not expressly called upon to renounce chiliasm, as our fathers always did under such circumstances. One is not to trifle with false belief.