# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1950_S1146
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

eS an pat ite rm

Wet ahethe ny eee fons

ae ®
re

Cate Rote i hae eae

beat dan ate

596 INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS

Concord, has always rejected as a determining factor in the ques.
tion of church fellowship is regarded by Dr. Arndt and the ALC
as a deciding factor in that question. .
We therefore request Synod to correct Dr. Arndt’s essay so
as to rule out the distinction between fundamental and non-fun.
damental doctrines as a factor in the question of church fellow.
ship and to bring it into harmony with the position of Synod, that
“the term ‘non-fundamental doctrines’ . . . should not be made to
convey the idea that anything clearly revealed in Scripture, al.
though not absolutely necessary for salvation, may be denied.”
(Proceedings, 1941, p.302; cf. also Memorial 604, p. 292.)

Those Weak in Faith

In the essay under consideration, Dr. Arndt also improperly
and inadequately defines “those weak in faith” and the attitude
to be taken toward them in the words: “Dr. Walther was right
when he repeatedly stated that absolute unity cannot be achieved
here on earth, human weakness being what it is. The question at
once presents itself whether we do not have to insist on loyalty
to everything that God has taught. We do indeed; but it does not
follow that we cannot have church fellowship with people who in
this or that point of doctrine are in error. Church fellowship is
not made impossible by the existence of error in the views of an
individual or of a church body, provided these errors are of a non-
fundamental nature and the right attitude toward Christ and the
Word of God is maintained. ... We must deal gently with those
weak in the faith and not reject them on account of the miscon-
ception under which they labor.”

We therefore request Synod to correct and amplify the para-
graph which seeks to define “those weak in faith” so that the fol-
lowing Scriptural. truths are included:

a. That an individual or church body can only then be con-.

sidered “weak” if the error which has arisen is “due to a deficiency
of knowledge or of precipitancy” (Lehre und Wehre, 14, p. 105),
and if the individual or church body proves that the proper attitude
towards God’s Word is being held by acknowledging and removing
the error called to their attention by such as possess a correct
knowledge of Scriptural truth. A church cannot be dealt with as
“weak” when it has made these errors a part of its confession,
clinging to them in spite of admonition through several genera-
tions, or if it insists that any points of doctrine deviating from
God’s Word be treated as a matter of indifference. (Cf. 1 Thess.
5:14; 1 Cor. 9:22; James 5:19-20; also Lehre und Wehre, 14, p. 107;
Brief Statement, Par. 29.)

b. That our treatment of the “weak” is never to be limited to

i re

INTERSYNODICAL AND DOCTRINAL MATTERS 597

YHose whe err in non-fundamental doctrines, but applies also to
fandamental doctrines. (Acts 15:1; cf. Lehre und Wehre, 14, pp. 105

~ and 106.)
_ tu Finally, in order that the first objective of our Synod, namely,

the “conservation and promotion of the unity of the true faith,”
may be attained,

We therefore request Synod to require of Dr. Arndt that he
agree to these corrections of his essay.

We herewith advise Synod that in a contrary case Synod must
be viewed as a body which has forfeited its orthodox character
according to its own official confession. (Brief Statement, Par. 29;
Cf. Lehre und Wehre, 36, p. 262: “We Missourians consider a
church body, as a body, orthodox only when the true doctrine
resounds from all its pulpits and lecture chairs and in all writings
which appear in public within such church body; when every
erroneous. teaching is stopped in the manner prescribed by God
as soon as it makes its appearance. We Missourians must and want
to be judged according to the doctrine which is taught by our in-
dividual pastors, be it in San Francisco or in New York, St. Paul
or New Orleans, or in our publications, immaterial whether they
appear officially or unofficially. If it were shown us that even but
one pastor were preaching false doctrine, or that even one period-
ical were in the service of false doctrine, and we would not put
a stop to this false doctrine, we would thereby have ceased to be
an orthodox synod and would have become a unionistic fellow-
ship.”)

Signed by Theo. Dierks in behalf of himself and the following:

Rev. A. A. BRAUER Dr. P. E. KretzMann
Rev. Pau. H. Burcporr Rev. W. H. McLaucaum
Rev. A. T. KreTzMANN Txeo. DrerKs

Morrison, Ill, April 1, 1950

Regarding the President’s Theses on the Church
(Memorial 610)

Wuereas, The President of Synod has submitted a number
of sets of theses pursuant to the Agreement made with the signers
of “A Statement” and a resolution of the Chicago Convention
that he “continue to submit to pastors and congregations material
for the Scriptural study of the questions at issue” raised by
“A Statement” and memorials referring to “A Statement”; and

Wuereas, The President of Synod asked that members of
Synod point out anything in the theses that is unsatisfactory; and

Wuereas, The theses on the Church in the last paragraphs on

}

Py
ae
er
uo
ae
yt
3: