# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S519
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

520 INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS
[648]
Report of the Committee on Finnish Relations

As a token of the unity of faith and confession existing between
the National Church and our Synod the undersigned was privileged

to attend, during the past triennium, all annual conventions of

our Finnish brethren, viz.: 1947 in Ashtabula, Ohio; 1948, in

_Calumet, Mich.; and 1949, in Ely, Minn. This year he intends to
be present again at the convention in Sebeka, Minn., June 23—27,
while our own Synod is convening at Milwaukee.

Our mutual bonds of fellowship have not only continued but
were strengthened. With the gradual introduction of the English
language (besides Finnish] our brethren make good use of our
synodical literature. Since their ministerial candidates are grad-
uating from our Springfield Seminary, their number of pastors
has increased considerably.

Your Committee is always ready to serve you with recom-
mendations of good Finnish literature and with other suggestions,
especially if you live in a Finnish community.

With deep regret the undersigned must add that during the
past triennium it has pleased God to call the other two members
of our Committee, with whom he always worked together in full
harmony, to their eternal rest: Pastor E. Wegehaupt of Decatur, Ti,
and Dr. Paul Schulz of Springfield, Ill.

Lidderdale, Iowa R. HERRMANN
March 30, 1950
[649]

Report on Agreement of Breslau Synod
and Free Church
Dear Dr. BEHNKEN:

In your letter dated September 29 you inquired as to whether
our St. Louis faculty has ever given its “nihil obstat” on the doc-
trinal document which became the basis for the agreement reached
between the Breslau Synod and the Evangelical Free Church
in Germany.

In discussing the matter at the last faculty meeting, it was
agreed by resolution that the censorium of the final text of this
document which was given by the censors of the Concordia Theo-
logical Monthly before the document appeared in print. is the
faculty’s “nihil obstat.” This gives it the approval of the entire

faculty. Louis J. Sick, President
Concorp1a Seminary, St. Louts, Mo.

INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS 521

[650]
Questions Asked by the Hon. Wisconsin Synod

), fe DeaR BRETHREN:

Among the many divine blessings which we have enjoyed
during our one hundred years of history, of which we have been
reminded frequently at our Centennial Convention in 1949, not
the least has been the bond of unity which has welded your Hon-
orable Synod and ours together for more than three quarters of
a century. This unity is precious to us, and it is purely for the
sake of preserving it that we venture to address you at this time.

During recent years we of the Wisconsin Synod have found
ourselves constrained to voice our protest against the rising tide of
unionism and its attendant evils of indifference to Biblical truth
and undermining of confessional Lutheranism. In our action we
have taken the stand that is outlined in the Brief Statement of
the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod, Art. 28, “On Church
Fellowship,” particularly the last sentence: “We repudiate unionism,
that is, church fellowship with adherents of false doctrine, as
disobedience to God’s command, as causing divisions in the Church,
Rom. 16:7; 2 John 9—10, and as involving the constant danger of
losing the Word of God entirely, 2 Tim. 2:17-21.”

In our efforts we have, however, been handicapped by the
fact that members and sometimes official representatives and
organizations of your Synod have been involved in what seem
to be obvious violations of these principles. Efforts to remedy this
situation by dealing with the individuals involved have met with
little or no success. Official discussions in an Intersynodical Forum
have been equally futile. On the other hand, the positive testi-
mony that we have tried to give has been to a considerable extent
neutralized by the silence of your Synod. The inevitable result
has been serious confusion and offense.

In an endeavor to clarify this confused and confusing situation,
which, if not corrected, will vitiate the spiritual life within both
your Synod and ours, we address to you the following questions
on the basis of the mutual fellowship of our synods:

1. Does the Missouri Synod approve of the participation of
its pastors in the programs and in the joint worship of inter-
synodical laymen’s organizations, specifically Lutheran Men in
America? If not, only a public disavowal of the offense will
remove it.

2. Does the Missouri Synod approve of the co-operation of
some of its welfare agencies with Lutherans with whom it is other-
wise not in fellowship, in view of the fact that such welfare work
is inseparably associated with spiritual implications? If the ‘Synod

t
(

a
ee
«