# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S531
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

532 INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS

2. Differing interpretations as to the sovereign grace of God,
Predestination, sola Dei gratia, etc.;

3.. Varying ranges of interpretation with reference to chiliasm,

. premillennialism;
4. Differing conceptions as to the true nature of the Church;
5. Varying policies in regard to membership in secret orders:
a. On the part of the laity:.
b. On the part of the clergy;

6. Differing policies in regard to unionism, that is, unionistic
services together with those who are not of the Lutheran
faith.

Other serious differences in doctrine between the Missouri

Synod and various member churches of the National Lutheran

Council could be enumerated. No one familiar with the doctrines -

and practices of minorities, or in some instances majorities, in the
various Lutheran groups in America will gainsay Dr. Bersell’s
statements regarding the lack of doctrinal unity existing in some
Lutheran church bodies in the National Lutheran Council today.

Fields of Co-operation Limited

With few isolated exceptions the work carried on by the
National Lutheran Council can be designated either as spiritual
work or as work with spiritual implications, in which we cannot
participate if we are to remain true to the principles which guide
Missouri Synod action in working together with other Christians
with whom we are not in pulpit and altar fellowship.

Thus the field of possible participation on the part of the Mis-
souri Synod in the National Lutheran Council work in which we
could co-operate without violation of our principles is confined to
a very small area.

Polling of the Boards

All major boards and commissions carrying on work for the
Missouri Synod were invited to consult with our Committee. Each
of these boards carefully surveyed the possible areas of joint work
with the National Lutheran Council in its specified field. Each
board was asked to give the Committee its official expression on
the: question:

“Shall the Missouri Synod join the National Lutheran Council
and participate in that phase of work which you are carrying. on
for Synod?”

' The Board for Missions in North and South America, the
Armed Services Commission, the Board for Foreign Missions, the
Board for Higher Education, the Student Service Commission, the
Board for Parish Education, the Missionary Board of the Lutheran

INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS 533

Synodical Conference, were unanimous in their recommendations
that so far as their areas are concerned, we should not join the
National Lutheran Council.

The only board that found areas of possible co-operation with
the National Lutheran Council was the Board for Public Relations.
Our Committee readily agrees that in this limited field co-operation
would be possible.

A representative of Associated Lutheran Charities also met
with your Committee and advocated that our Synod join the
National Lutheran Council and participate in the work of the
Council particularly in the field of “welfare service.” With refer-
ence to “institutional missions,” however, he declared that because
pulpit and altar fellowship had not been established by the Mis-
souri Synod with the bodies comprising the National ‘Lutheran
Council, only a limited co-operation could be achieved. It must be
borne in mind that neither the Associated Lutheran Charities nor
its constituent bodies are synodical agencies. It would not be
within the jurisdiction of a synodical convention to declare that
we should join the National Lutheran Council for the purpose of
carrying on joint charitable endeavors, which are not under the
direction of Synod.

What Would We GAIN?

Since theoretically if we should join the National Lutheran
Council and participate only in those areas of work not classified
as spiritual, without violation of our principles, it is but fair to
ask, “What would we gain by such membership?” It is the con-
sidered opinion of your Committee, based on an analysis of expe-
riences and facts, that it is more expedient for the Missouri Synod
to carry on its work independently than to put a certain portion
of it under the jurisdiction of a larger group of men, two thirds
of which are not in fellowship with us or are not in agreement
with us on many important aspects of the work of the Church.
A factual evaluation of the work of the Missouri Synod today
leads us to believe that its work can be carried on independently
more efficiently, more effectively, and with greater economy than
it could if we were to become participating members of the National
Lutheran Council. Joining the National Lutheran Council would
be of no advantage to the Missouri Synod. This has become clearly
evident especially during this past decade. The National Lutheran
Council consists of eight different groups. Not all of these are in
pulpit and altar fellowship with one another. Every action must
be approved by a majority before it can go into effect. The Mis-'
souri Synod is one closely integrated body, which can move rela-
tively quickly. The Lord has abundantly blessed our work in the