# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1944_S834
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS 251

_ Wuereas, The efforts of our Committee on Doctrinal Unity in
. the Lutheran Church of America to carry out the resolution of the
1941 convention to bring about the framing of one document of
agreement have not met with success; -

Therefore to safeguard our own confessional position, to keep
the unity of the Spirit in our own midst, and to further the cause
of true unity in the Lutheran Church, be it

Resolved, That Synod rescind its Resolution No.2 of 1938
(Proceedings, p. 231) and until one document of agreement has
been framed retain the Brief Statement of the Missouri Synod
without any qualifications as our clear Scriptural Confession and
best contribution toward the cause of true doctrinal unity in the
Lutheran Church of America.

Tye EASTERN PASTORAL CONFERENCE OF THE
Sout Wisconsin DISTRICT
Martin W. Strasen, Chairman
J. F. Boercer, Jr, Secretary

[605]
_ To Rescind 1938 Church Union Resolutions

EstTEEMED BRETHREN:

Three years ago St. J ohn’s Ev. Luth. Church of Clinton, Iowa,
informed the honorable Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and
Other States, in convention assembled at Fort Wayne, Ind., June
18—28, 1941, that it finds unacceptable the doctrinal basis for future
fellowship between the Missouri Synod and the American Lutheran
Church which was adopted by the 1938 convention of Synod in
St. Louis, for two reasons, namely, 1) because the resolutions mili-
tate against Scripture, and 2) they are not based on fact. Our
memorial was substantiated at some length but was not accorded
the courtesy of such a consideration or reply by Synod as would
be demanded by the unity of Christian faith and. love.

Events since 1938 and 1941 have shown that the St. Louis
resolutions have served the cause of disunity rather than that of
unity, as witness, :

1. The American Lutheran Church has made it clear by its
official resolutions that it is not accepting the three documents
contained in the St. Louis resolutions, but that it insists on regard-
ing its own Declaration together with Missouri’s Brief. Statement -
as a sufficient basis for union and that in restricting itself to these
two documents it expects the latter to be viewed in the light of
the former; . ‘ .