The ill-minded object in all sorts of ways to Luther's catechism and generally criticize it as if it were something sectarian: The Lutherans would not have otherwise known how to spread their doctrine among the people than through a simple catechism; it is imperfect and lacks many important doctrines; there is no proper method and order in it; Luther should have written everything only in the words of the Holy Scriptures; he has omitted the applications and has not indicated, among other things, how the Ten Commandments serve for repentance and sorrow over sin, the Creed and the Sacraments for the revival and strengthening of faith. etc. In particular, in certain passages in this Catechism, people have wanted to take offense at one expression or another and have thought that Luther did not always explain himself correctly, adequately and comprehensibly, which is what some of those who profess to belong to our church sometimes imagine for lack of sufficient insight. Now, Luther was indeed a human being, and even in his writings he acknowledged that he was subject to human faults and weaknesses, and therefore needed to grow and increase through the grace of God, which he well recognized and also testified to. However, what one might find objectionable in his Catechism, or what might seem questionable in it, is of such a nature that it can be answered and saved with reason. This is what Johann Martin Schamel has done in a special writing
and thus undertook a good work. He published: "Vindiciae catecheticae, das ist, gründliche Rettung und Beantwortung verschiedener bedenklichen Umstände, Stellen und Redensarten in dem kleinen Catechismus des sel. Luther", 1713, which was not only reissued in 1726, but was also added in 1727: "Supplementa oder fernere Beantwortung der bedenklichen Stellen und Umstände in dem kleinen Catechismus des fel. Luther."