# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1973_S40
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

40 MINUTES OF THE CONVENTION

Discussion of Resolution 3-09

The floor committee on resolutions then proposed
the following amendment. Line 29, TB 114, the words
“and be it finally” were to be changed to “and be it
further.” The remainder of the resolution would then
read: “Resolved, That the Synod recognize that the mat-
ters referred to in the second resolved are in fact false
doctrine, running counter to the Holy Scriptures, the
Lutheran Confessions, and the synodical stance and for
that reason ‘cannot be tolerated in the church of God,
much less be excused and defended’ (FC, SD, Preface,
9). And be it finally resolved, That these matters be
turned over to the Board of Control of Concordia Sem-
inary, St. Louis.” The motion to amend the resolution
was made and seconded. The question concerning the
constitutionality of Res. 3-09 was then placed before
the convention. A delegate stated that Res. 3-09 and
3-12 cannot be considered until the provisions of syn-
odical Handbook 5.05 have been fully met or until they
have been properly amended. The chair asked the par-
liamentarian and the Secretary for their opinions. The
parliamentarian stated that it was his opinion that if the
convention were to adopt the proposed amendment, since
no faculty member is charged in that resolution, it
would be constitutional to consider the entire Resolu-
tion 3-09. It was also the opinion of the Secretary that
this resolution contains sufficient safeguards and does
not preclude appeals procedures, so that it could be con-
sidered, although he stressed that this was not an opin-
ion of the Commission on Constitutional Matters but his
personal opinion. After hearing the opinions, the chair
ruled that Res. 3-09 was in order and could therefore
be considered. The Board of Control of the seminary
of St. Louis was then asked to address the convention.

Rev. George Loose, chairman of the Board, intro-
duced Dr. William Buege of the Board of Control to
speak briefly for it. He stated that on the basis of Res.
2-28 of the Milwaukee convention, it was felt that the
material of the Fact Finding Committee was to be
turned over exclusively to the Board of Control, and
that after one year a preliminary report was to be
turned over to the President of the Synod. At the be-
ginning there had been an attempt to isolate the issues.
Because of problems, however, the Board of Control re-
versed itself and began to interview individuals. The
results have been documented and turned over to the
Board for Higher Education and the President of the
Synod.

Chairman Loose reminded the delegates that it is
part of the task of the Board of Control to supervise
doctrine. He made it clear that the judgment of the
Board which is closest to the problem was that no
charge of heresy had been filed.

Board member Kurt Biel addressed himself to the
supplemental reports prepared by several members of
the Board. He stated that these reports had not been
seen by members of the Board before appearing in the
Convention Workbook. An official reply which had
been prepared in executive session could not be made
available to the delegates prior to the convention.

Board member Dissen, one of those preparing sup-~
plementary reports, indicated that the report had not
been brought to the Board of Control because by a
previous ruling the chairman of the Board had indi-
cated that the Board had no authority to approve the
issuing of minority reports. He indicated that he be-
lieved the Board of Control should not be brought into
the issue which was presently before the convention.

Vice-President Weber, also a member of the Board
of Control, said that he had objected to some of the
things in the preliminary report which was sent to the
President of the Synod. His conscience compelled him
to submit the minority report. He believed the church
needs to tell the seminary which things are to be taught
and certain things which are not to be taught.

David Preus

Discussion was interrupted at this point in order that
Dr. David Preus, President of the ALC, might address
the convention. He was introduced by his cousin, Dr.
J. A. O. Preus, President of The Lutheran Church —
Missouri Synod. Dr. David Preus congratulated his cou-
sin on his reelection to the presidency and greeted the
delegates on behalf of the American Lutheran Church
as sisters and brothers in Christ, partners in the Gospel.
He stated that he believed the Holy Spirit is calling us
to manifest our unity in the faith. When asking mem-
bers of his church what he should say to The Lutheran
Church — Missouri Synod, he was told that he should
bring two words to them. The first of these was, “We
love them.” The second: “Tell it like it is.’ He briefly
traced some of the difficulties which had been felt in
discussions between The Lutheran Church — Missouri
Synod and the American Lutheran Church and indi-
cated that much of this difficulty was due to their dif-
ferences in history. While the LCMS has been a single
body, the American Lutheran Church is accustomed
to putting together different people with different his-
tories. It takes for granted that a long period of time
is often needed for adjustment between the groups
which are merged. Using an illustration, he described
the church as something which is not like strained soup
but rather like a fruit cake with room for even a few
nuts.

Action on Res. 3-09

Following the presentation by the President of the
American Lutheran Church, discussion of Res. 3-09 was
resumed. On a point of privilege a delegate expressed
concern about “just cause and due process.”

The convention then approved the distribution of
the reply of the Board of Control to the minority board
report, as well as an answer to that reply.

A substitute amendment which would have added
the words “And that these matters be decided by Sep-
tember 1st, 1973” to the amendment proposed by the
committee was declined by the delegates after the sub-
stitute amendment had been discussed and the question
called. Discussion then proceeded on the amendment
as presented by the floor committee on Seminary Issues.
After a period of 30 minutes had elapsed the question

vmceomy

i
i
£
‘
i
=
z
i
¢
i
a
&
#
a
E
#
y
id
‘

ape eae