# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1981_S82
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

82 PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS

Missouri Synod desires fellowship, and perhaps also
merger, among all Lutherans on the basis of agreement
in doctrine. If we believed this existed with the ALC
there would be no “fellowship in protest,” and no
present proposal to sever fellowship. But we are willing
to listen to you, to receive instruction from you, as we
know you are also willing to accept our witness.

Dr. Preus’ earlier remarks about our Commission on
Theology and Church Relations being a group of “ivory
tower theological hairsplitters” were inappropriate and
unkind, but I am sure that our pastors and people at all
levels will nevertheless be happy to discuss church
fellowship, the Biblical and confessional basis for
church fellowship, our doctrinal differences, areas of
cooperation and other subjects of mutual interest to
both churches.

Please understand that beyond what I have said I
cannot commit the LCMS, but I know our convention
will give serious consideration to any proposal you
make or to the recommendations your president has

made. .
Sincerely,

J. A. O. Preus, President

Appendix C

Guidelines from Special Committee
in the Event ALC Fellowship
Is Suspended

Guidelines for Implementing the Suspension
of Fellowship with the ALC

Ifthe convention of the Synod should adopt Res. 3-01
which declares that The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod is not in altar and pulpit fellowship with The
American Lutheran Church, the question arises as to
what implications that decision would have for our life
together as a Synod. What would be the impact on our
day-to-day relationships with brothers and sisters in
Christ in the ALC—parochial day schools jointly owned
and operated, Missouri Synod pastors serving ALC
congregations, etc.?

The Commission on Theology and Church Relations
has spoken to some of these questions. For example, the
commission has stated that both “the abrupt discontin-
uation” of joint efforts as well as “prolonged continua-
tion” of them “may cause harm to the ministry of the
Gospel.” The commission asks the Synod to recognize
that its congregations and pastors may provide
“responsible pastoral care to individuals of the ALC”
and that the Synod continue its study of inter-Lutheran
and inter-Christian relationships to determine “which
practices and activities are appropriate.” Many ques-
tions remain, and for that reason the President of the
Synod has appointed this committee to discuss these
matters and to provide some guidelines for the Synod.

It should be noted at the outset that there are
members of this committee who do not favor the
recommendation that the Synod should declare that
altar and pulpit fellowship no longer exists between The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod and the ALC. The

purpose of this committee, however, is not to comment:
on whether or not altar and pulpit fellowship should }
broken. Furthermore, the committee does not consid
questions regarding pan-Lutheran activities to
within the scope of its assignment, since those ques
tions, while requiring serious study by the Synod, wi
be with us regardless of the decision reached concernin
altar and pulpit fellowship with the ALC. ;

In what follows the committee sets forth som
suggested guidelines which are intended to help th
Synod in its relationships with the ALC in the nea
future, if altar and pulpit fellowship is broken. W
realize that not every question of casuistry can bj
addressed here, but we submit the following in th
fervent prayer that the Lord of the church will enablew
to do His will and to further the cause of the preci
Gospel of our Savior Jesus Christ.

I. The Acceptance of Pastors

The following procedures for the transfer of pastor
between the ALC and The Lutheran Church—Missout
Synod were adopted when fellowship was declared
1969:

a. The acceptance of pastors between churches shal
require the mutual approval of the two national preside
and the two district presidents who are involved.

b. Interviews of transferring pastors shall be conduc
by appropriate district administrators of the receivini
church. If the district president desires, the man may
referred to our synodical Colloquy Board.

c. Special prerequisites (such as additional schooling
temporary service under an agreement, etc.) may}
demanded at the discretion of the district president of thi
receiving church body.

d. Denial of approval or recommendation, or refusal
accept a man even though he has been recommended, sh
be the internal concern of the respective churches
subject to interference or judgment of the sister chur

e. It is assumed that the recommending officials.
consider the transfer requests in view of the greatest be!
for the men and congregations involved and not arbitr:

N.B. It should also be noted that a pastor can
approved for transfer only upon receipt and acceptanc
recognized call to service in the ministry of the receiut
church body.

Since 1969, teachers have also been transferred frdi
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod to the ALE.
accordance with these rubrics.

Since the confessional interests of the Synod’é
protected by the involvement of the District preside!
(see points b and c), it is recommended that we contin!
to use these rubrics regarding acceptance of past 0
from The American Lutheran Church until the né
convention of the Synod. In the meantime, we recok
mend that the Council of Presidents and the Pastot
Colloquy Board be asked to review our policy regardit
acceptance of pastors from all Lutheran church bodi
and report to the Synod with appropriate recommend:
tions with a view toward uniform practice. :

II. The Acceptance of Lay Members

Upon receipt of a letter of recommendation or trail
fer of the member(s) to be received, the pastor should;
fairness to those from the ALC who desire membershii