EC4: Justification — LDJ essay revisited (Western District 1859) (LDJ)

     This continues from Part EC3a (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have seemingly been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — I have blogged twice before (here and here) on this foundational essay of the old Missouri Synod. While the doctrines of Church and Ministry are quite important in Christian doctrine, yet they are based on the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification. It all hinges on this doctrine.

       Walther gave dozens of quotes and references to the writings of Martin Luther and so this essay (Western District 1859) provides the greatest compilation of Luther quotes every assembled on this doctrine. It still seems incredible that it is no longer available from CPH or the LC–MS, Walther's great essay on the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification. So I am revisiting this essay on this blog post to allow it to shine once again, with additional material. Just one quote to share the heavenly doctrine that Luther brought to light again:

“In the life beyond we will forever find our joy and delight in this, that the Son of God so deeply abased Himself that He takes my sin on His back;  yes, not only my sins, but also those of the whole world, from those of Adam down to the very last man, … On this now stands the basis of all Christian doctrine; whoever believes this is a Christian…” — Martin Luther

      The following is a vastly updated version of the one published over 10 years ago. I spent some days updating the hyperlinks and adding new ones. In most cases the links provide direct, immediate access to even the American Edition's translation, along with my English translation of the St. Louis Edition of Luther's writings. Almost all of the links to outside reference materials are on the Internet Archive and should survive this blog. So if one downloads this file, these links should be viable for many years, should the world continue:

 This file may be downloaded >> here <<; same file with no highlighting >> here <<.

In the next Part EC4a… we give a proper presentation of a major essay by Walther on The Proper Form of a Christian Congregation.

Martin Luther on the Pope

      The world today is focused on the death of Pope Francis. American flags are generally flying at half staff around our area, though some neighbors have not lowered their flags. Who can escape this news and all those who mourn over this, including "name only" Lutherans, the ELCA? So far the LC–MS is keeping quiet on this news, at least officially. But while researching Martin Luther's writings on the Law, I ran across this quote in his commentary on Genesis 18:19: 

“Similarly, the world does not hate us for teaching the Gospel and the benefits of Christ in pure form. All accept this and approve of it, unless they are manifestly ungodly. But the mischief [caput mali] results from our attachment of a comparison [of our doctrine] with the doctrine of our opponents, from our statement that the Pope is the Antichrist [Pontificem esse Antichristum], and from our disapproval of the teachings and the wicked deeds of the adherents of the pope.” (Am. Ed. 3, p. 221; StL 1, 1186; WA 43, 33)

Because there are a lot of "adherents of the pope" in our world, true Lutherans who accept what the Lutheran Confessions teach, as Luther teaches above, will find themselves the object of much "mischief" or malice from this same world.

EC3a: Loehe & the Last Unction (reckless, betrayal)

Romanizing Lutheran

     This continues from Part EC3 (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have seemingly been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — Although this segment is not associated with a CPH previously translated convention essay of Walther, I ran across a short blurb in the report of the 1858 Western District convention that had an interesting title on p. 31 (see image below). It had to do with the "Last Unction", or what is called today "Extreme Unction", or "Anointing of the Sick". What I found was a surprisingly sharp rebuke of Pastor Wilhelm Loehe, just as was done by Walther in the same convention's essay on "Confessional Subscription".

       In the report, background reference was made to an article in Lehre und Wehre, so I took the time to polish a translation of that brief article. Although not indicated, it was surely written by Editor C. F. W. Walther. From Lehre und Wehre, vol. 4, p. 90 (March, 1858) [Google Books]:

The Last Unction [performed by Loehe].

    Even this institution is being repristinated by the Romanizing Old Lutherans in our day. We learn from the Noerdlinger Correspondenzblatt, published by Bauer in Neuendettelsau and Stirner in Fürth, that Mr. Loehe has done so. He does, however, cite a passage from Luther, who, according to this saying, wanted to allow the sick person to be anointed with oil in addition to other treatment. But if Luther, in his great prudence, allowed the Papists to retain this practice, provided they did not add anything to it, it would hardly be possible to dismiss it as if it were in Luther's spirit for Lutherans to reintroduce this ceremony now, when it is impossible to offend any Lutheran by omitting it. It does not occur to us to accuse Pastor Loehe of the already established doctrine that the Last Unction is a sacrament, but there is no doubt in our minds that the reintroduction of the same on his part arises from a certain sympathy for a cult, such as the Roman one, and that, however innocent the matter may now appear, it could easily become the seed of the most dangerous vines in the garden of our church. If Herr Pastor Loehe had a truly Lutheran spirit, it would not occur to him to commit such extravagances, and indeed such extravagances with which he tramples on the feelings of all Lutherans, indeed of all Protestants, with unparalleled ruthlessness. History also teaches us that most of the atrocities of the Roman Church started out as harmless enough. There is no need to paint the devil on the wall; he comes of himself.

    We will print the relevant passage here, recording it as a sign of the times from the December number of the Correspondenzblatt from 1857: …[see the Last Unction liturgy used by Loehe on pp. 90-94]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

      Now that we have the background on this matter, we find that the Synod's 1858 Western District wanted to add their own pronouncements, applied in the form of resolutions at their convention (p. 31):

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Pastor Loehe and the Last Unction.

A member of the Synod drew the Synod's attention to the report in the March issue of Lehre und Wehre [v. 4, p. 90-94] about the Unction [Oelung: "oiling"] performed on a sick person by Pastor Loehe in the Deaconess Institute in Neuendettelsau.

The Synod recognized it as its duty to address this in the following resolutions.

Resolved:

1. The Synod deems it a reckless presumption that a minister of the Church who is bound to the confessions of the Church should presume on his own hand to introduce a ceremony which must give offense to the whole Church.

2. The Synod considers it outrageous when Pastor Loehe invokes Christian freedom and thus performs the ceremony in obedience to an apostolic command.

3. The Synod declares it to be a betrayal of the Lutheran Church to say that the latter had only evaded its duty to obey this command, which was supposedly not temporary but given for all time, by subterfuge.

4. The Synod declares it to be a blasphemous offense against God's Word and an antichristian denial of the Gospel to say that this ceremony is performed in obedience to a divine command, and yet at the same time to cast doubt not only on whether the Lord will grant the sick person bodily healing, but even on whether he will also grant him peace, i.e. the forgiveness of sins.

5. The Synod cherishes the confident hope that, as a result of such atrocious phenomena, the eyes of all honest Lutherans in Germany, too, may be opened to the goal to which such a Romanizing direction as that of Pastor Loehe, deeply mourned by the Synod, necessarily leads.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

     Hmmm… indeed a very sharp rebuke of Loehe: “reckless presumption”, “outrageous”, “betrayal of the Lutheran Church”, “blasphemous offense against God's Word”, “Romanizing direction…deeply mourned by the Synod”. — 

      In today's LCMS, their "Christian Cyclopedia" offers no Christian teaching against the prevailing practice of "Extreme Unction" or "Anointing of the Sick". One must go back to the 1927 and 1954 Cyclopedias to get a Lutheran warning on this practice. Proof positive that there is a "certain sympathy for a cult, such as the Roman one" that largely ignores these issues, also with Loehe. — In the next Part EC4 we uncover again Walther's love for the Lutheran Doctrine of Justification.

EC3: Confessional Subscription (of Pres. Harrison?) (Western 1858, again)

      This continues from Part EC2 (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have seemingly been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — Although the following essay (Western District, 1858) has previously been translated three times, in CTM XVIII p. 241-253,  by Theo. Tappert and by Matthew Harrison (At Home in the House of my Fathers. p. 120-137), yet its importance cries out to be revisited again to see where these translators may be suspect in their own "Confessional Subscription". This becomes abundantly clear on page 12 of the original report where Walther makes the following statement against Pastor Wilhelm Loehe (underlining is Walther's own emphasis):

     In a similar spirit [as the Reformed and Calvin!], a few years ago an entire conference of Lutheran preachers gathered in Fuerth in Bavaria, headed by Pastor Loehe in Neuendettelsau in Bavaria, encouraged our Synod to understand and interpret the Symbols according to Scripture in order to come to an agreement on the controversial doctrines of Church and Ministry. …these additions [of Loehe] rather indicate that one cannot accept them as they read, and that one therefore requires to be able to connect with the words of the symbol a meaning which does not lie in them, but which one considers to be the right Biblical one. [Compare Harrison's translation here, p. 124-125.]

As I was polishing my translation at this point, I kept comparing it with Rev. Matthew Harrison's translation. I wanted to see what comments he would have concerning this major fault of his favorite theologian, Wilhelm Loehe. Would he be critical of Loehe at this point? Harrison himself was critical of the 1947 CTM translation which 

"was an abridgement, which unfortunately left out most of the critical references to other American Lutherans (an indication perhaps of where the Synod was headed already in 1947)."

On this point Harrison was critical of his own LC–MS of 1947 and their unionistic spirit. But he was totally silent when Walther brought up the false confessionalism of Loehe, even while Harrison praised the idea of "Confessional Subscription" in his introduction to Walther's essay. — More evidence brought forward by Walther, p. 13:

"A fourth way of subscribing the symbols only conditionally is to declare that one can only profess what is confessional in them. Pastor Loehe, for example, only subscribes the symbols with this condition. He writes: 'I distinguish in the Book of Concord what is confessionally said and what is not confessionally said, — and I distinguish even more. It does not occur to me to stick to the letter and be guilty of symbololatry. I accept what is confessedly (confessionally) said in the confessional writings.' It goes without saying that this excludes a significant part of the doctrinal content of the symbols from what can be professed as one's faith; just as Pastor Loehe, in the same writing where he states the above, openly declares several parts of doctrine found in the symbols to be not pure and therefore capable of purification." [Compare Harrison's translation here, p. 125.]

Again, no comment by Rev. Harrison. To praise confessionalism while not defending it vigorously is empty praise.

      While Harrison's translation is now freely available to the public on the Internet Archive, and is perhaps better in some respects, yet my translation includes (1) Walther's own emphasis of wording that is sometimes missing in Harrison's translation, (2) links to some of Walther's sources and (3) links to each original German page. I have added highlighting and some comments along the way.  It is presented below in an embedded window:

This document may be downloaded >> here <<. The German original may be downloaded >> here <<.

      In the next Part EC3a we publish a short blurb from this same 1858 Western District report against Pastor Loehe on another doctrine, the Last Unction, or Extreme Unction.

EC2: "Gerhard on Baptism" — faith in Baptism

      This continues from Part EC1a (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have seemingly been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — I was unable to obtain the original German 1857 Synod convention essay by Walther because it was missing from the Ft. Wayne library. Also, strangely, it was missing from the scan by the LC–MS (see here, missing Appendix E). However I discovered that Walther's essay was "followed by a further oral discussion of this topic". This "discussion" was included in the LC–MS scan, p. 355-356, and so one may glean the substance of the matter.

      Walther's essay references his article in Der Lutheraner vol. 11 p. 76 ff. and 84 ff., and the quote from Gerhard on Baptism. One may read the full Gerhard quote there on pp. 76-77. Walther’s teaching on the matter of faith in the Sacrament of Baptism would be largely covered in the full 2-part Der Lutheraner article. Although this essay is not publicly available except in the 1992 CPH copyrighted translation, yet it may be revealed that this all sprang from a Baltimore congregation’s disagreement with John Gerhard on Baptism. The above statement by Gerhard on Baptism seems to be contradicted by: 

    1. The following statements of the Confessions: “AC XIII § 1-2 . The Use of the Sacrament:

"the Sacraments were … instituted to awaken and confirm faith in those who use them"

    2. The following and similar statements of Luther:

“For the sacraments should not and cannot be received without faith, or are received to greater harm.” (StL 19, 1333)

What follows is a translation of the "oral discussion":

Concerns regarding several statements by Joh. Gerhard reported in Der Lutheraner regarding the effect of Holy Baptism, etc.

(See: 1. Report of the Eastern District Synod, p. 21; and 2. Report of the same, p. 28.)

The paper prepared and read by Professor Walther on this topic (cf. attachment E. in the Appendix [unavailable due to LCMS failure to scan the whole 1857 report and all its attachments and was cut off at page 395]) was followed by a further oral discussion of this topic, and first of all of the first point, concerning the effect of Baptism. The Synod endorsed the analysis presented in the paper and passed a resolution to the effect that the petitioners in Pastor Keyl's parish [in Baltimore] would be informed that the general Synod concurred with the Eastern District Synod's declaration that there is no real contradiction between the teachings of John Gerhard and the teaching of Luther and the symbolic books: Baptism (in which water is held in God's commandment and connected with God's Word and promise) works faith; and the Word (whether before or in baptism) works faith. Baptism, like the Word, demands and works faith at the same time.

On this occasion, the question was raised: how the godparents could answer “yes” in the name of the child to the question, “Do you believe?” since the child had not yet been baptized, unless the word had already worked faith in the child.

The reply was: the godparents, like the child's parents, together with the preacher, proceeded to the baptism of the child in the confident belief that God would grant it faith, which they also implored Him for in faith. They were certain that God, who demands faith, also gives it. God is not bound to the act of pouring water over someone; He can also give the person being baptized faith beforehand.

The Synod also agreed to the discussion and response to the second point in the presentation, namely that, according to the judgment of the Eastern District Synod, there is no real contradiction when John Gerhard says that Paul was converted without a sermon; Luther, on the other hand, says that Paul was converted by Christ's word as a preaching of the Law and the Gospel; and decided that this too, along with the above, should be reported to the applicants.

Incidentally, the Synod also had to criticize the fact that the petitioners had immediately gone public with their concerns about the orthodoxy of a teacher of our church [Gerhard] who is generally recognized as orthodox, instead of first informing the editor of the Lutheraner, who had prompted them by publishing the article in question [in the missing attachment in the Appendix], and asking him for the desired information and instruction, what the Synod would like to recommend to them for similar cases in the future.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Walther answers the problem of a seeming difference between Gerhard and Luther: The issue is clarified by the context, Luther was against ex opere operato use and Gerhard was not dealing with ex opere operato use as Luther was. The gist of the essay and discussion may be summarized in the statement concluding the first paragraph:

"Baptism, like the Word, demands and works faith at the same time."

In the next Part EC3… is a necessarily new translation of Walther's famous essay on "Confessional Subscription".

EC1a: Christianity Today comments on Walther's writings

Selected Writings of C. F. W. Walther

      This continues from Part EC1 (Table of Contents in Part EC1), a series restoring availability of English translations of several of Walther's convention essays that have apparently been abandoned by Concordia Publishing House. — Before I continue with this series, I would quote a book review from the well-known magazine Christianity Today published in 1983 regarding CPH's earlier series of Walther's writings that Director Suelflow had published. Suelflow had also quoted the following book review in his "Introduction" to the 1992 2-volume Essays, p. 12-13. The 1983 6-volume series, titled Selected Writings of C. F. W. Walther, was the first major project to get more of Walther's many writings, beyond his books, into the English language. (These are now available on the Internet Archive. Editorials. Letters, Essays, On the Church, and Law & Gospel) Suelflow surely worked tirelessly on this effort and he is to be commended for doing what others in the Synod should have done 30-40 years earlier. The English speaking members were confined to a few books, and many were abbreviated.

      This book review was authored by a well-known Reformed theologian, Prof. Mark A. Noll, who we have met before. Noll had also penned an essay on B. B. Warfield in 1993, 9 years after this book review. Noll's remarks carry a Reformed perspective, making it a curious attempt to portray Reformed theologians on par with Walther. Yet his decidedly high praise for Walther is quite striking. One may read the whole book review here:

 

          "Lutheran Theology at Its Best: Walther's Works"

        (Book review by Mark A. Noll)

Carl Ferdinand Wilhelm Walther (1811–1887) is one of the great figures of American church history. … a dynamic preacher, a faithful pastor, a learned professor, a diligent scholar, and a prolific author. His views on the church (which favored a Congregationalism adapted to the free air of America) and on salvation (which advocated such a high view of grace as to be called “crypto-Calvinistic” [!]) shaped the Missouri Synod during the years in which it emerged as a mighty American denomination. Yet no one beyond the Lutherans, and not even many of them, pay much attention to Walther today. One reason for this regrettable neglect is that all his writing was in German.

…No longer do evangelicals have any excuse to overlook this forceful teacher, whose work cries out for comparison with his better-known [Reformed] contemporaries. Walther’s sermons and letters reveal a Christian zeal as fervent as [Dwight L.] Moody’s. His editorials and convention essays rank him with Charles Hodge as a defender of the Trinitarian orthodoxy of the Reformation. His essays on the church speak as boldly for Lutheranism as C. I. Scofield did for dispensationalism [!]. And his masterpiece, The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel (here presented in a competent abridgment), is one of the few truly significant works of evangelical theology produced in the United States. This series makes available some works from a mighty man of God. Our only regret can be that it has taken so long for them to appear in English.

I wonder that Dr. Suelflow maintained some correspondence with Prof. Noll and provided him with copies of the translations to facilitate this book review. Whether Noll's book review generated a wider interest in "Walther's Works" is unknown. But it is interesting that a Reformed theologian should praise Walther far more than many LC–MS theologians today, especially Dr. Robert Kolb. — To add to the above, Dr. Suelflow made the following comment on p. 12 of his "Introduction": 

"Some 30 years ago [~1962] several of us felt that our beloved Synod would shortly be losing its Biblical-Confessional heritage if steps were not taken to trans­late Walther’s writings.

In the next Part EC2 we honor Dr. Suelflow's legacy "to trans­late Walther’s writings". The first installment in our long series deals with the an issue with the doctrine of Baptism.

EC1: Suelflow’s “years of effort” restored: Walther’s early essays (Part EC1 of 15)

      I discovered recently that there is some old unfinished business regarding the contents of the second volume of Concordia Publishing House's (CPH) English translations of "Walther's Work's", All Glory to God. I had provided, in a 2016 blog post, a listing of the sources used for the first volume, Church Fellowship. Now, 8 years later, I am returning to this complex project of cross-referencing the newer re-published works to the older ones. That led me to discover a disturbing fact.

      The original 1992 2-volume series Essays for the Church, the legacy of August Suelflow, Director of Concordia Historical Institute († 1999), had the following front covers as previously reported 12 years ago: 

Essays for the Church (CPH 1992)
Volume I                                      Volume II
Essays from 1857-1879                Essays from 1877-1886

What is notable about the CPH republishing of the 1992 series is that Essays Volume II was almost completely republished in Church Fellowship (CPH 2015) and All Glory to God (CPH 2016),

while Essays Volume I remains mostly unavailable and out-of-print. And with no announcements from CPH or Concordia Historical Institute (CHI) about any further work being done for "Walther's Works", it appears they have abandoned these missing essays. Of the 17 essays in Volume I, only 3 were re-published. These are in Walther's Works: Church Fellowship (CF). The following is a listing of these 3 available essays from Essays Volume I. The red text indicates the page numbers where the essay was re-published in Church Fellowship:

* Confessional Subscription—Western District, 1858 p. 19-29 [CF p. 11-28] [EC3]

* Communion Fellowship—Western District, 1870 p. 202-228 [CF p. 145-192] [Also available from CTS-FW bookstore for $3.99]

* Sixteen Theses—English District, 1872 p. 229-243 [CF p. 193-216]

On the right is an image of the "Contents" page: ——>

      So what has happened with the remaining 14 essays in Volume I? Below is a listing of these missing essays as shown on the "Contents" page:

Gerhard on Baptism—Synod, 1857 Essays I, p. 15-18 [EC2]

Justification — Western District, 1859 p. 30-63. [EC4]

Church and State—Western District 1862 p. 64-68 This essay was erroneously identified as Walther's but was actually delivered by District Pres. J. G. Schaller and so I have not included it. But Walther's essay was published separately as Die rechte Gestalt…. or The Proper Form of an Evangelical Lutheran Local Congregation Independent of the State. I am publishing a new English translation of this complete book, not an abridgement. [EC4a]

Calling a Pastor—Synod, 1863 p. 69-87 [EC5]  

The True Visible Church:

Theses I—III, Synodical, 1866 p. 88-104 [EC6]

Theses III—VI, Western District, 1867 p. 104-125 [EC7]

Theses VI-X, Central District, 1867 p. 125-144 [EC8]

Theses XI—XIII,. Eastern District, 1867. p. 145-160 [EC9]

Theses XVII—XVIII A, Western District, 1868 p. 160-170 [EC10]

Thesis XVIII A-C, Central District, 1868 p. 170-178 [EC11]

Thesis XVIII C-D, Eastern District, 1868 p. 179-190 [EC12]

Thesis XVIII D, Adiaphora, Central District, 1871 p. 190-201 [EC13]

Conversion—Northern District, 1873 p. 244-263 [EC14]

Certainty of Salvation—Illinois District, 1879 p. 264-297 [EC15]

As I reviewed again the content of these essays, I was amazed that so much of the material that CHI Director August Suelflow worked so hard to get translated has been apparently abandoned. Just how much work and desire went into the 1992 translations of Walther convention essays?  Listen to Director Suelflow's "Introduction" (Essays Volume I, p. 13):

Immediately after the six [CPH] English volumes appeared [© 1981], the undersigned enlisted several men to complete translating the convention essays. All of them have now been completed after years of effort. Some of the early translators were Herbert Richter (four essays), Fred Kramer (three), Alex Guebert (with Theo­dore Tappert), Robert Smith, Lawrence White, and Jim Ware (one each), for a total of 11. (Reinhold Stallmann later also did one.) Unfortunately, some of the earlier translators were unable to continue. At that time the undersigned contacted his old friend, the Rev. Everette W. Meier, in a letter of 28 March 1985 and hesitantly asked: 

“Are you interested in doing more translation work? For the Walther anniversaries (the 175th of birth in October 1986 and centennial of death in May 1987) I hope that we could translate as much as possible of the Walther literature which consists largely of convention essays.. . . If you are interested in translating some, please let me know. There still is extremely much to be done.” 

Pastor Meier immediately jumped at the opportunity. Just at that time he suffered from ill health and retired from the active ministry. This presented a fortuitous opportunity to have Pastor Meier translate large segments of the Walther essays. In these two volumes he translated half of the essays. 

It was our fervent hope that, even if all these translated essays could not be published immediately, at least the English version could be made available to those who were especially interested. Accordingly, over a number of years the undersigned accumulated these essays at Concordia Historical Institute until such a day when they could be published. 

When Pastor Meier’s work was completed, Con­cordia Publishing House was persuaded that it could serve the church best by issuing the essays in print. Excellent support for publication came from several sources, such as Dr. Will Sohns, president of the Wyoming District; Dr. J. A. O. Preus, former president of The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod; Dr. Karl L. Barth, president of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis; and Dr. Ralph A. Bohlmann, current president of the Synod.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

One may note the Synod-wide lack of enthusiasm for Suelflow's endeavors. He had to work hard to accomplish the work of translation. Admittedly, the work was a large project, but so is the work for John Gerhard's Theological Commonplaces. That lack of enthusiasm for Walther has only increased today. Suelflow's project had the endorsement of 3 Synod presidents, so why does President Matthew Harrison not support at least the re-publishing of the remaining major convention essays that have already been translated?  Why indeed…

      These essays are about to come alive again — but before that, a quote from the magazine Christianity Today on the earlier 1983 CPH 6-volume series, in the next Part EC1a.

- - - - - - - - - - - - -  Table of Contents  - - - - - - - - - - - - -

EC1: This intro; Suelflow's “years of effort” restored; 3 essays given abbreviated coverage: "Gerhard on Baptism", "Justification", and "Church and State",

  EC1a: Christianity Today comments on Walther's writings

EC2: "Gerhard on Baptism" — faith in Baptism (Synod 1857)

EC3: Confessional Subscription (of Pres. Harrison?) (Western 1858, again)

  EC3a: Pastor Loehe and the Last Unction (reckless, betrayal) (Western 1858)

EC4: Justification — LDJ essay revisited (Western District 1859) (LDJ)

  EC4a: Walther's The Proper Form of an Evangelical Lutheran Local Congregation Independent of the State (Western 1862)

EC5: Calling of a Pastor by a congregation (Synod 1863)

EC6: TVC: Church in the proper sense; Synod astonished (1866 Missouri)

EC7: TVC: Church in proper, improper sense; Hypocrites; Heretics, schismatics and sects (Western District, 1867)

EC8: TVC: Greatest righteous separation: the Lutheran Church; ceremonies (Central District 1867)

EC9: TVC: Christianity gathered spiritually; Antichrist; hermeneutics (Eastern 1867) (Hrm04)

EC10: TVC: Hermeneutics; Justification; plus the Antichrist (Western 1868) (RWD) (Hrm05)

EC11: TVC: Justification, Law & Gospel, Hermeneutics (Central District 1868)

EC12: TVC: Fundamental, non-fundamental doctrines; Copernicanism; Jews; Adiaphora (Eastern 1868)

EC13: TVC: Adiaphora — Central 1871

EC14: Conversion—Northern District, 1873

EC15: Certainty of Salvation—Illinois District, 1879