# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S345
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

474 INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS
[616]

Synod Reject False Teachings in “A Statement”
Wuereas, There is great confusion in our beloved gs
the present time because of new doctrines and teachi din
seminated through the mails and also in the official and unof.
religious magazines, and since our body is in great danger of
losing its orthodox character as a true visible church faithful to the
Word of God, and since the welfare of many souls is at stake

because of this unfortunate situation; be it therefore _

Resolved That our honorable Synod reject the false teachings
in “A Statement” disseminated in our midst in the year 1945.
that it determine whether a Scriptural engagement is tantamount
to marriage or not; and that it answer all other questions of
doctrine raised in the last decade. Also that it declare all major
and minor teachings which are contrary to the Scriptures, such
as unionistic worship, prayer fellowship, joint prayer and com-
mon Communion with those who differ in doctrine; that Romans
16:17-18 does not refer to all false and heterodox teachers; that
there is a visible side of the Invisible Church; that the Holy Scrip.
tures are not inspired verbally; as well as the denial of the
Scriptural proof against the Antichrist; to be false and soul-
destroying and request the authors of such false doctrines to
retract them.

That the honorable Synod pray God by His Holy Spirit to
purge all false doctrines from our midst by His almighty power,
Zion EvANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH

or Kappa, Howarp County, Inp.
Harry Hartman, Chairman
Rozert Porwman, Secretary

INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS 475

Dogmatik, Vol. 3, pp. 491, 487-488; Lutheran Confessions,
ga Triglot, pp. 21—23, 855, 857; Luther, St. Louis Edition,
C 1180). Accordingly a church body has become a unionistic
VO Ohi when it does not without delay reprove, combat, and
fello - the retraction of every unscriptural teaching which
i veehin its midst, as well as when it does not expel from its
fellowship persistent teachers of false doctrine who refuse to retract
‘, error, but permits the leaven of false doctrine, unretracted,
their ntinue working in its midst. In such a body the demands
to “4 trinal discipline made by minority groups bring no results
toe cnow ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
purge out therefore the old leaven.” 1 Cor. 5:6-7; ef. Gal. 5:9. “Now
I beseech you... avoid them,” Rom.16:17. Note: A unionistic
body does not always as such formally resolve to permit false
teachings to remain within its fellowship. The membership as
such is often ignorant of what is going on, because responsible
officials keep the full facts from the membership as such, e. g., the
U. L. C. A, as described by Dr. Theo. Graebner in The Problem
of Lutheran Union; the General Council, as described in the Pro-
ceedings of the Synodical Conference, 1875, p. 13 ff.); and
Wueress, The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod now has
the distinctive characteristics of a unionistic fellowship, as is shown
by the following facts:
1. “A Statement,” September, 1945, in conjunction with its
explanatory brochure, Speaking the Truth in Love, sets forth the
following false doctrines:
A. That deviation in doctrine or practice from certain teach-
ings of the Bible (“details of doctrine”) is not divisive of church
fellowship.

, Exmer I. Miter, Past B. That not all acts of joint religious work and worship with
_ March 22, 1950 : . By Castor persistent teachers of false doctrine or their adherents are to be
[617] / regarded as religious unionism forbidden by God’s Word.

C. That any two or more Christians may meet and pray
together if they do so for a good purpose.

D. That Rom. 16:17-18 is not to be applied to all Christians
who differ from us in certain points of doctrine, but that this
passage is limited in its application to those who are not Chris-
tians. (Cf. Speaking the Truth in Love.) (The above-mentioned
doctrines are contrary to God’s Word in Rom. 16:17-18; Matt. 7:15;
1Tim.6:1-5; etc. Compare also the Scriptural position of the
Missouri Synod set forth in: The Formula of Concord, Concordia
Triglotta, p. 1095; Pieper, Chr. Dogm., pp. 486—492; Mueller, Chr.
Dogm., pp. 556—560; Synodical Catechism, Qu. 186D and 326 D;

Brief Statement, Par. 28—29; Constitution of Synod, Articles XI
and 1.11.)

1. Reject and Disavow Doctrinal Errors in
“A Statement”

2. President Admonish District Presidents Who have
Departed from True Doctrine

3. Require District President to Admonish Pastors,
Professors, Teachers, etc.

Wuereas, The marks by which a unionistic fellowship can be
recognized and identified have been clearly laid down in our
synodical literature (Lehre und Wehre, Vol. 36, p. 261; Brief State-
ment, par. 29; Mueller, Christian Dogmatics, p. 557; Pieper, Christ-