Again, these brethren forget that Luther thought it his duty to _reform_ the church of his birth, and did _not leave it until driven out by the Pope_.

The efforts of American Lutherans to reform and render more biblical the ecclesiastical framework of our church, is therefore, _truly Lutheran in principle_, indeed far more Lutheran, than to retain unaltered those symbols, when we believe that the progress of Protestant light and biblical investigation for three hundred years, has proved them to contain important errors.
Thirdly, they forget that _Luther himself never saw, much less approved, the most objectionable and stringent of these books_, the Form of Concord, the profession of which they would make essential to Lutheranism.
Fourthly, they overlook the fact that _entire Lutheran kingdoms, such as Denmark and Sweden, from the beginning rejected some of these books_, and yet are everywhere acknowledged as Lutherans.
Fifthy, [sic] they forget that the _Form of Concord itself professes to regard Confessions of faith only an exhibitions of the manner_ in which Christians of _a particular age understand the Scriptures;_ implying that they were not supposed even by the authors of the symbolic system themselves to be unchangeable, although their incorporation with the civil law of the land, closed the door against all subsequent improvement.
A revision of our symbolic standpoint, is therefore perfectly consistent with primitive Lutheranism; and according to the Congregational or Independent principles of Lutheran church government, advocated by Luther, and hitherto practiced on by our American church, as well as avowed by the Constitution of the General Synod, each District Synod is competent to do this work for herself as long as she retains "the _fundamental_ doctrines of the Bible as taught by our church." How then can this important work be best accomplished, of releasing ourselves on the one hand from the profession of the errors contained in the Confession, and on the other of avowing the unadulterated truths of God's word?
1.

Shall we _drop the practice of binding our ministers to any creed except the Bible_, and refer in unofficial ways to the _Augsburg Confession_, as in general a correct summary of our views of Bible truth?
This was the practice of the _fathers of our church in the Synod of Pennsylvania from the beginning of this century, till within two or three years_.

It was practiced by that body whilst it was controlled by _Drs.

Helmuth, Schmidt, Muhlenberg_, of Lancaster, _Schaeffer_, of Philadelphia, _Endress, Lochman, J.G.Schmucker, Geissenhainer_ subsequently of New York, _Muhlenberg_, of Reading, and the present venerable Senior of the Ministerium, Rev._Baetis_.This plan we always regarded as too lax, and preferred the distinct avowal of the Augsburg Confession as to the fundamental doctrines of the Bible, and were ourselves instrumental in introducing its qualified recognition into the General Synod's Theological Seminary in 1825, and her Constitution for District Synods in 1829.