# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S340
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

ay

464 INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS

ligious work or worship with those who advocate and support false
doctrine is UNIONISM, 1 Cor. 1:10; Rom. 16:17, even though there
be no denial of the truth or approval of error in express words; and

Wnuereas, Every error, also in details of doctrine, persistently
advocated, is divisive of church fellowship (Matt. 28:20; 2 John 19.
1 Cor. 1:10; Matt. 5:17-19); and ,

Wuereas, Our Lord Jesus Christ has given us the great com.
mission to “make disciples of all nations,” Matt. 28:19, and at the
same time gives no one the right to disregard any teaching of His
Word or to deviate from it, Matt. 28:20, and no “crisis” (the mount.
ing tide of atheism, Communism, Romanism, secularism, world-
wide distress, etc.) excuses anyone from this directive; and

Wuereas, In order to retain God’s Word in all purity, we must
promptly correct any erroneous teaching in our fellowship (Jer,
23:31-32; 2 Tim. 1:12; 4:1-5); and

Wuereas, When we hold fast these Scriptural principles, in-
sist upon their application, and in true love for God and man
earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints, the
blessing of our Lord and Savior rests upon us and our work, as
He has promised John 8: 31-32; Matt. 28:19-20; therefore be it

Resolved, That the President of The Lutheran Church — Mis-
souri Synod and the Presidents of the several Districts of the Mis-
souri Synod, as obligated under Articles XI and XII (especially 7
and 8), promptly and without respect of persons admonish any
member of Synod who teaches error and if necessary (according
to our Constitution) suspend such person from membership; and
be it furthermore _. .

Resolved, That if the afore-mentioned responsible officials of
Synod do not act according to the Constitution of Synod, they deal
honestly with Synod and tender their resignation.

Paut G. Kocu

[612]
Remove Leaven of False Doctrine and Practice

We are deeply worried and seriously troubled in our con-
sciences because of the lamentable doctrinal disunity which has
been permitted to continue in our beloved Synod, especially since
the publication of “A Statement” almost five years ago. We tremble
when we think of what it will mean to us and especially to our
children and children’s children, if Synod will not AT THIS CON-
VENTION purge itself of this leaven. of false doctrine by rejecting
in no uncertain terms the doctrinal aberrations that are expressed
in “A Statement,” and if it will not likewise AT THIS CONVEN-
TION institute immediate and effective measures to put a stop to

INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS +465

tiscriptural statementarian practice that.is found and that is in-
ante’ at ‘an alarming rate in many sections of our. beloved
Chureb. We refuse to believe that the Missouri Synod is willing
to yield the field to Satan and to forfeit the precious treasure of
ity of doctrine, which we have by. the grace of God enjoyed
a 100 years and through which the Lord has blessed us so

abundantly.

In order that thousands of troubled souls in our Synod might

be put at ease, WE

1: Respectfully request the Hon. Synod to give us clear and

unequivocal answers to the following questions:

A. Do you accept or do you reject “A Statement” with its doc-
trinal aberrations? ‘

B. Do you accept or do you reject the St. Louis Faculty opinion
on Rom. 16:17-18, which reads: “We shall never be able to
say with absolute certainty whether Paul is here issuing
a general warning or is speaking of a special group, and
if the latter is the case, what particular group he. has in
mind.” (“Church Fellowship,” Opinions by the Faculty of
Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, Mo., Manuscript for Course
in Dogmatics, Concordia Publishing House, 1946, page 19),
an opinion which casts serious doubts upon the clarity of
the Scriptures and especially upon a passage which our
Synod has recognized and used as a sedes doctrinae for
100 years?

C. Do you accept or do you reject the position taken in Dr.
Theo. Graebner’s Prayer Fellowship, page 4: “Rom. 16:17
deals with enemies of the truth who come with the sinister
purpose of deceiving innocent hearers,” a position which for
all practical purposes removes Rom. 16:17 from the Scrip-
tures, which are “profitable for doctrine, for reproof;te.”?

D. Do you accept ‘or do you reject the unscriptural position,

“taken in an essay delivered before two synodical Districts,
where Dr. W. Arndt, in speaking of establishing fellowship
says: “Church fellowship is not made impossible by the
existence of error in the views of an individual or a church
body, provided these errors are of a non-fundamental ‘na-
ture and the right attitude toward Christ and the Word of
God is maintained”? — Southern California and California
and Nevada Districts, 1949. _ (Boe aE ged

E. Do you accept or dq you reject the unscriptural opinion. of
the St.Louis Faculty “that betrothal or engagement must
not be regarded as tantamount to marriage”? +-May 24, 1949,

F. Do you approve of or do you condemn the. unionism which