But as they are few in number, and all relate to non-fundamental points, this does not necessarily follow.

As nineteen twentieths of the creed are sustained by Scripture, and embody a rich and ample exhibition of divine truth, ten times as extended as that which was invested with normative authority in the golden age, the first three centuries of the Christian church, and used as a term of Christian fellowship, we may well retain the creed, after in some way disavowing its several errors.

And the historical importance of the document, as the type of a renovated Christianity, authenticated by the blessing of Heaven, renders its retention desirable, as far as it has approved itself to the conscience of the church, after the increasing philological, exegetical, and historical light of three progressive centuries.
The position of those who maintain that _genuine Lutheranism_ demands perpetual adherence to everything contained in this Confession, yea, as some affirm, to all the former symbolical books, is utterly untenable.
In the _first_ place, these brethren forget that the symbolic system, _i.e._, the practice of binding ministers to the so-called symbolical books, was _not_ adopted at the organization of the Lutheran Church, _nor at any time during Luther's life_, nor until more than half a century after the rise of Lutheranism, and more than a quarter of a century after the noble Luther had gone to his heavenly rest.
_Symbolism is therefore no part of original Lutheranism_.

The efforts of Luther to reform the Romish Church began in 1517--the first regular organization of Lutheran churches was not made until some time after his excommunication by the Pope, in 1520.

The first directory for Lutheran worship was published by Luther in 1523, in which, although private masses and the idea of the mass being a sacrifice had been rejected, the _ceremonies_ of the mass, even the _elevation of the host_, (though not for adoration) were retained; another improved one in 1526; and the Augsburg Confession was presented to the Diet in 1530; but the full symbolic system contended for by some of our opponents, was not adopted until 1580, _after the Lutheran church had existed more than half a century!!_ That system, historically considered, is not, therefore, Lutheran, but _Post_-Lutheran and _Ultra_-Lutheran, for it is after him in time, and goes beyond him at least in one point of doctrine, and far beyond him in the abridgement [sic] of ministerial liberty of doctrinal profession, and in exaction of uniformity on minor points.