# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S1139
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

we

ae

2
©

rere

Jerse weeqen swat wee

ER LE ART LEI AEN EE: wT Se ea tee ee
Such Sis TRA id wa cara a sonst
Soh ee S

te enetatnnenedeic man
“0 a Eom tei NE el A Res AO

.

eee ee armrest:

ee

Seater test BA te ree bee ot or

por

Mikide Roni hets ocetin

cone:

te te URN TE ER RO

ee are?

res
yy ty
Aahoee ents peg etipbtmatinh

Veh lS ns thet Mle ees

578 INTERSYNODICAL AND. DOCTRINAL MATTERS

Apostolic doctrine, Rom. 16:17. Our Brief State .
confesses: “We repudiate unionism, that is, aes fellowst vetore
the adherents of false doctrine, as disobedience to God’s comment
as causing divisions in the Church, Rom. 16:17.” (Par. 28.) 4,
The “Common Confession”

does not confess th P
doctrine of church fellowship. e Scriptural

The Last Things

The “Common Confession” Treads: “ i
to teach anything as a sign of Christ’s rand advent ee ing
or foretold in the Holy Scriptures,
@ mass conversion of the Jews, a prelimin i
martyrs, and a visible millennial reign of Christ ‘on the .
before the Day of Judgment.” (Par. XII.) The “Common Cn
fession” rejects as “an error to teach anything” such as the thines
there mentioned, for such things are “not promised or foretold
in the Holy Scriptures.” .

No one will deny that millenn
tolerated within the A. L. C. to this day. But such millennialism
as taught, for example, by Dr. Reu in his Lutheran Dogmatic. ;
1928 ed., pp. 305—310; 1941—42 ed., II, pp. 228—247; 1945 od,
pp. 373-383, is treated in the A. L. C. as an open question that is,
a question which need not disrupt church fellowship. This ‘position
is also held by the chairman of our Committee on Doctrinal Unity,
who declared at the conventions of the California Districts that
“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 nature and the right
attitude to Christ and the Word of God is maintained.”

The “Common Confession” does not confess that millennialism

is an error because of which it is necessary to sever church fellow-
ship, if persistently advocated.

second advent not Promised
such as the expectation of

ialism is being taught and

* * *
-The “Common Confession of Faith” does not confess th
e full
truth of God’s Word. It does not remove a single one of the doc-
frinal differences which have for decades existed between the
erican Lutheran Church and the Missouri Synod hi
do exist to this day. Ynod and which
(Signed) (REv.) Tueo. Dirks, Morrison, Ill.
(Rev.) Wattace H. McLaucauin, Pittsburgh, Pa.
(Dr.) P. E. Krerzmann, Cuba, Mo.
(Rev.) H. D. Mensine, Tinley Park, Ill.

Signatures attested by (Rev.) H. D. Mensrnc
Tinley Park, IIL, April 5, 1950 -

INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS 579

Memorial on the “Common Confession”
(Memorial 604)

Wuereas, The “Common Confession,” proposed by the Com-
mittee on Doctrinal Unity of The Lutheran Church — Missouri
Synod. and the Committee on Fellowship of the American Lu-
theran Church is being submitted to the convention of The Lu-
theran Church — Missouri Synod in June, 1950, for approval or
revision or rejection; and

WuerEaS, The “Common Confession” falls short of meeting
the requirments of the first object of The Lutheran Church —
Missouri Synod as stated in its Constitution, Art. III, Sec. One;
to wit:

“The conservation and promotion of the true unity of faith

(Eph. 4:3-6; 1 Cor.1:10) and a united defense against schism

and sectarianism (Rom. 16:17).”

This object of Synod clearly states that it is not enough merely
to confess the true doctrine, but that it is also necessary to defend
the true doctrine of God’s Word against any and every schism
and, accordingly, to voice rejection of any and every error in
clear and unmistakable terms; thus failure to do so is in effect
toleration of false teaching; and

Wuereas, The “Common Confession” fails in making mention
of specific errors in points of doctrine heretofore in controversy
between The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod and the Amer-
ican Lutheran Church, such as the doctrines of election and con-
version, the verbal inspiration of Holy Scripture, the distinction
between the invisible Church and visible church groups; and

Wuereas, Quotation of John 17:20, 11-23 in Art. IX of the
“Common Confession” is misapplied to the visible Church, while
our Lord applies it to the spiritual unity in the invisible
Church; and

Wuereas, Ambiguous words are used in Art. XII of the “Com-
mon Confession” in identifying the Antichrist with the Roman
Papacy, permitting various interpretations; and

Wuereas, The “Common Confession” avoids special mention
of Romans 16:17 and other Bible passages demanding of us not
to enter into fellowship with such as teach otherwise than God’s
Word teaches, to remain separate (2 Cor. 6:14-18); and to with-
draw ourselves from “any man that teaches otherwise and con-
sents not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus
Christ, and to the doctrine” (1 Tim. 6:3-5); and.

WuHereas, The “Common Confession” makes no mention of
the Brief Statement of the doctrinal position of The Lutheran
Church — Missouri Synod, the official confession of The Lutheran