This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1878 Excerpt: ...reprinted and the error crept in with it, in our Introduction to the Augsburg Confession and into the Conservative Reformation.2 The vouchers we give for the citation show any one who verifies them the right date: the quotation is repeated3 with the correct date, and the same vouchers are used, with the addition of ...
Read More
This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1878 Excerpt: ...reprinted and the error crept in with it, in our Introduction to the Augsburg Confession and into the Conservative Reformation.2 The vouchers we give for the citation show any one who verifies them the right date: the quotation is repeated3 with the correct date, and the same vouchers are used, with the addition of Coelestinus. If Dr. Brown, who is so compassionate to "any one who is not very careful," had taken a little notice, he would have seen that all the citations from p. 232 to 237 in the Conservative Reformation are chronologically arranged, and that the date must have been written July 3d. He would have seen in the three lines which precede it, that our inference and our theory are " that between June 8th and 25th, we have Melanchthon's declaration, cited in our former extracts, as to Luther's approval of the Confession in the form it took after the discussion." If he thinks us wicked enough to alter a date, as he pretends he does, and fools enough to add to the altered date the vouchers which at once stamp it as a forgery, 2 P. 234. 3 Conserv. Reformat., p. 239, three lines from the bottom of the text. he will yet hardly be able to imagine that we would falsify the date in such a way as to confute the very theory for which it was altered, and that just under a repetition of our theory, we would put a falsified date which would overthrow it. When Dr. Conrad was misled by it, he was compelled to form another theory, utterly out of harmony with our conclusions and our argument. He did not look at our citation in its connection, and did not have Buddeus, or De Wette's edition of Luther's letters, and so was misled. Dr. Conrad had verified our vouchers when he possessed the books to which we refer, and the honest care with which he ...
Read Less