# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1969_S85
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

THEOLOGICAL MATTERS 85

wishing to develop their own cultural practices within
the bounds of the Scriptures and the Book of Concord.

Z10oN LUTHERAN CHURCH
Wichita, Kans.

Cart L. BORNMANN, Pastor
Ropert QuapbE, Chairman
FaitH LUTHERAN CHURCH
Kansas City, Kans.
RONALD FRICKE, Pastor

A. B. Yancy, Chairman

Rev. THomas G, VAN DER BLOEMEN
Wichita, Kans.

(2-37)

To Repudiate 1967 Resolution Discouraging
Selective Conscientious Objection

WuereasS, On the one hand, The Lutheran Church —
Missouri Synod had consistently taught that —

If anyone is convinced in his own mind either that the
use of military force for any purpose whatever is wrong
or that a specific war is not a just war, he must refuse to
bear arms, for he must not violate the dictates of his
conscience. (CTM, Feb. 1955, pp. 127—128, “A Christian’s
Attitude Toward War,” a statement prepared by Lewis
W. Spitz Sr. at the direction of the 1953 regular conven-
tion of The LCMS; see also the editorial “My Country,
Right or Wrong,” by Theodore Engelder, Lutheran Wit-
ness, Sept. 30, 1930)
And this teaching is consistent with the teaching of
the entire church of the Augsburg Confession, the

church catholic, and Holy Scripture; and

Wuereas, On the other hand, the resolution “To
Pledge Loyalty and Obedience in Military Service and
to Discourage Selective Conscientious Objection,”
adopted by the 1967 convention of The LCMS, which
states in part:

WHEREAS, Selective conscientious objection to military
service tends to promote chaos and anarchy in time of
national emergency; therefore be it

Resolved, That we discourage selective conscientious
objection. ...

WHEREAS, There could be exceptional cases in our
communion in which a Christian’s conscience might lead
him to refuse to bear arms; therefore be it

Resolved, That we minister to and counsel with a
member under our pastoral care who refuses to bear arms
for his country.

seriously compromises this teaching —

a) by discouraging our Christian people from raising
the issue of conscientious objection in the one
context in which it must be raised, that is, when
our country is in fact engaged in a military oper-
ation that has occasioned doubts as to its justice,
and

b) by making the conscientious objector the object
of pastoral counseling and care without even
mentioning that he is entitled to the full backing
and support of his church, a church which has
taught him the necessity of distinguishing be-
tween just and unjust wars, which has sensitized
and informed that conscience by the Word of

God, and which has taught him that it is sinful
to act against conscience; and

Wuereas, This compromising resolution is an offense
to many of our synodical brethren, in some instances
having caused them to disaffiliate themselves from a
synod which has refused to support both its own teach-
ing on conscientious objection and those who conscien-
tiously follow it, and this resolution is a scandal to those
outside our synod, both Christian and non-Christian;
therefore be it

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church — Missouri
Synod —

a) Withdraw and explicitly repudiate the above res-
olution of its 1967 convention;

b) Reaffirm the traditional teaching of the church
on this subject as expressed in the statement prepared
at the direction of the 1953 convention (above);

c) Fully. gladly, and gratefully stand by and sup-
port those of our members who, acting on conscience
informed by the Word of God, feel they cannot partici-
pate in a particular war because they believe it to be
unjust, even if as individuals we may disagree with
their judgment.

FuLLt-TimE Campus PASTORS CONFERENCE
ReuBeN BaERWALD, Chairman

(2-38)
To Rescind Resolution
on Selective Conscientious Objection
WHEREAS, The Augsburg Confession teaches that
Christians may engage in “just” wars; and
Wuereas, The Augsburg Confession thereby teaches
that Christians must not engage in “unjust” wars; and

Wuereas, The Scriptures and the Book of Concord
teach that a Christian conscience, enlightened by God’s
Word, will strive to avoid all evil, “unjust” things and
to do whatever is good and “just”; and

Wuereas, Christian pastors are obligated to respect
Christian consciences which, on the basis of available
evidence, sincerely believe a given war to be unjust; and

Wuereas. The Synod has conveyed serious miscon-
ceptions over against these truths in Resolution 2-35
(New York convention, 1967), namely:

1. That we do not support Christian consciences
which sincerely believe a given war to be unjust;

2. That we may invite people to deaden their con-
sciences and merely follow government orders blindly;

3. That we approve of the decisions which our gov-
ernment has made, is making, and will make, both polit-
ically and militarily in Vietnam;

4. That the words of Luther, “It is neither safe nor
right to act contrary to conscience,’ may be hushed by
the voice of a government order; and

WuereAs, Failure to correct such false implications
could lead to results similar to those experienced by our
fellow Christians in Germany, where young men were