# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1969_S54
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

54 MISSIONS

theran Church — Missouri Synod (Handbook, 1967,
p.17) states: “Conditions for acquiring and holding
membership in Synod are: 2. Renunciation of unionism
and syncretism of every description, such as: a. Serving
congregations of mixed confession, as such, by minis-
ters of the church; b. Taking part in the services and
sacramental rites of heterodox congregations or of con-
gregations of mixed confession; c. Participating in het-
erodox tract and missionary activities”; therefore be it

Resolved, That the District Presidents perform their
constitutional duty to investigate, admonish, and disci-
pline those campus ministers who participate in union-
istic worship services; and be it further

Resolved, That those campus ministers who persist
in unionistic practices, after due admonition, be relieved
of their membership in The Lutheran Church — Mis-

souri Synod. Rev. C. L. Rxoapes
Chicago, II.

(1-18)
To Reaffirm Policy Statement
on Campus Ministries

Wuereas, A “Policy Statement on Campus Ministry’
(New York Convention Workbook, pp.52—53) was
adopted at the New York convention (Resolution 3-20,
Proceedings, 1967, pp. 101—102); and

Wuereas, The administration and supervision of the
campus ministry was delegated to the Districts (Resolu-
tion 3-20); and

WuerREAS, The New York convention urged us to
work toward but did not give approval of a unified
campus ministry among Lutheran bodies in America;
and

,

Wuereas, A recent ‘Position and Directional State-
ment on Campus Ministry,” distributed by the Synod’s
Board for Missions, states that one District has already
established a unified campus ministry; and

Wuereas, The synodical Board for Missions has ap-
proved this action and has commended it to other Dis-
tricts; and

WuerEAS, The synodical Board for Missions has
delegated the writing of program materials and other
functions to a new Department of Campus Ministry
under the Division of Educational Services, LCUSA;
therefore be it

Resolved, That we reaffirm the “Policy Statement on
Campus Ministry” adopted at the New York convention
and continue to delegate supervision and administration
of the campus ministries to the Districts; and be it
further

Resolved, That we request the Denver convention
to state clearly whether Districts are bound to follow
the “Policy Statement on Campus Ministry” approved
at New York (3-20) and the fellowship resolution (New
York, 2-18), in which members of the Synod are urged
to refrain from selective pulpit fellowship, or whether
a board, a District, or a campus ministry may choose

to disregard these synodical resolutions; and be it
further

Resolved, That we state our opposition to the Synod's
present participation in the Department of Campus
Ministries, Lutheran Council in the U.S.A. on the
grounds that program direction and content are the
prerogative of the Synod and Districts and cannot be
delegated to LCUSA without formal synodical action.

Rev. E. H. ZIMMERMANN, Executive Secretary
of Missions and Church Extension
Indiana District

(1-19)
To Correct Faulty Practices
in Campus Ministry

WHEREAS, The Synod’s New York convention in
Resolution 3-20 (Proceedings, 1967, pp.101—102) pro-
poses campus ministry principles that allow only co-
ordinative and consultative procedures in cooperative
efforts with the LCA-ALC joint campus ministry; and

Wuereas, Resolution 3-20 adopted definite guide-
lines in the CTCR “Policy Statement on Campus Min-
istry” (Workbook, 1967, pp. 52—53), which suggests it
is not based on an ecumenical principle of unionism but
on the ability to serve students; and suggests governing
propositions that the home congregation has the re-
sponsibility to manifest pastoral concern for parishioners
attending college, that the student should avail himself
of the services provided by our campus ministry, and
that there be consultation and cooperation to the ex-
tent it is necessary for cooperation to avoid working
at cross-purposes; and

WHEREAS, The Synod’s position on fellowship de-
mands that we avoid “unionism of every description”
and “selective fellowship”; and

Wuereas, Resolution 3-20 asks Districts to develop
their campus ministries in keeping with the adopted
policy statement while requesting the Board for Mis-
sions and its staff to advise Districts and campus pastors
of the synodical principles; and

Wuereas, Contrary to the synodical principle of con-
sultation and coordination in Lutheran cooperation, the
Ontario District proposes a unified or joint campus
ministry involving an all-Lutheran church body com-
mittee which is to administer all campus ministries and
also involves all church body committees in local situa-
tions which administer Lutheran campus work in a
Lutheran ministry, not a ministry of The Lutheran
Church — Missouri Synod (“The chaplain should be
responsible to and work under the Division of Educa-
tional Services of LCC ... That all work under a
Lutheran ministry in Ontario be combined and placed
under the direction of the Division of Educational Ser-
vices of the L.C.C.... A local committee .. . shall
serve as administrators and seek to assist the chaplain,”
etc.), thus transferring our campus ministry from our
District direction and supervision to a committee repre-
senting various Lutheran churches with whom we are