# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1981_S79 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) rcent. This is going to make more difficult various kinds of negotiations and interchurch relationships. Perhaps the greatest factor of all, however, is that if the merger takes place, the center of gravity in the new church will shift to the East, perhaps to New York or - philadelphia, where the greatest concentration of LCA Dutherans is to be found. Missouri and the ALC have - peen sort of bastions in the Mississippi valley. If the » genter of gravity moves to the East, Missouri will by - default inherit the entire Midwest as its area of activity “ahd influence. This will also give us a much greater ~- entree to the South and to the West of this country. Ina certain sense, if this happens, it could be the day of ~ greatest opportunity for the Missouri Synod in all its history. While it is true that the location of headquarters of a church body is not everything, it is also true that under the polity that one can expect from the new - church, the centralization in the headquarters will be far greater than the centralization that the Missouri ' Synod has always so cordially rejected. Among other things this can very well mean that if we plan and think carefully, the Missouri Synod can become the theo- logically and ecclesiastically dominant Lutheran church west of the Allegheny Mountains in this country. Therefore, as we contemplate actions regarding the particular point of ALC fellowship as well as the broader subject of inter-Lutheran relationships in general in North America, we need to be very careful to take stances and positions which will not jeopardize what could be a most interesting and most challenging future for what I think we all believe is an enormously dynamic and talented church. We are able to accomplish very, very great things, not only in such areas as Forward in Remembrance, but in missions, mass media, evangelism, and also in the area of confessional Lutheran theology. All of this, of course, is due to the blessing and mercy of God, but the fact is that God has accomplished some great things through our church. Therefore, as we contemplate one aspect of the inter- Lutheran relationship question, we must not be unmind- ful of all aspects of it, not only of the present but also of the future, not only of the next 5 years but also of the next 50 years. I have long hoped and prayed and contended that some better method for interrelating between Lutherans could be developed than we pre- sently have. I do not think the issue is totally black and white, one that is either full fellowship or total rejection. We have not as yet thought through the process of how we as a confessional church with a doctrinal heritage which we cherish and thoroughly believe, relate to those who do not share completely that heri- tage, but yet bear the Christian and in some cases the Lutheran name, so that on the one hand we do not become self-righteous isolationists or on the other hand raving ecumaniacs. Both of these positions are in error. All that has been said to this point was written prior to June 4, at which time I believed that I had said all that was necessary and probably more than was neces- sary in reporting to the Synod as these 12 years draw to aclose. However, on June 17 I received a letter from Dr. PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS 79 David Preus with an enclosure which I am appending to this report comprising a recommendation he was making to the Church Council of The American Luther- an Church during its June 22—26, 1981, meeting. I am appending the entire report so that you may read his recommendation in its context. The recommendation itself reads: “That the ALC Church Council invite the LCMS to join in encouraging widespread regional and local consultations regarding the continuance or non- continuance of altar and pulpit fellowship between the two churches, such consultations to precede any action to terminate fellowship between our churches.” As an additional piece of information I should share with you what many of you probably already know, namely, that six Districts of The American Lutheran Church (only two of which have communicated with my office directly), have passed resolutions asking The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod to continue its fellowship with The American Lutheran Church. For your infor- mation two of these six Districts together with six others have also urged the ALC to merge with the LCA. At this point of writing on June 18, one District of The American Lutheran Church has voted against merging. I wrote: to the Church Council of The American Lutheran Church on June 19, and am appending this letter also for your consideration and information. On June 24, the Council of The American Lutheran Church communicated with my office, indicating that they had adopted the recommendation of President Dr. David Preus, as read to you a few minutes ago. I felt it was only proper to communicate all of this late informa- tion to you. Quite obviously, the resolution of the President and Church Council together with that of the Districts of the ALC indicates a desire on the part of many members of the ALC that fellowship continue. It should be noted that as early as its 1977 convention, the Missouri Synod asked for multilevel discussions of doctrine with the ALC, but this was rejected by the ALC leadership and the only discussions in which they would take part were those of the now somewhat discredited Commission on Fellowship and one meeting between professors of the two churches, which produced little or nothing. Ido not believe that an action on our part to continue fellowship will deter or delay the merger. Whether The American Lutheran Church would be willing to hold such discus- sions in the event that fellowship is broken at this convention, is only a matter of conjecture. Whether the discussions would be of help in resolving our differences is also, of course, a matter of conjecture. The fact has to be faced very forthrightly that a break in fellowship on our part and a failure to hold discussions will positively guarantee that The American Lutheran Church will drift inexorably into the orbit of the Lutheran Churchin America to the point where the ALC will cease to exist. Again, how important this is to our people, most of whom together with the great majority of the ALC live in the Midwest, is again something that we must carefully ponder. In other words, American Lutheran- ism is at a crossroads and churches are taking courses