# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1906_S38
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

38 Proceedings of the twenty-first convention

we hold fast to this procedure, then by God's grace we shall soon become united over doubtful cases.

It may now of course also happen that a congregation cannot prove to the Church that it imposed the ban rightly. If this state of affairs arises, the congregation must let the ban fall and may not say that this is against its conscience. It may well be that it acted quite rightly in the exclusion; but if the legitimacy of the ban comes into question and cannot be proved by the congregation, then it must let the ban fall out of regard for the consciences. But if the procedure is always according to the three rules listed above, then in practice very, very few cases will occur in which the conscience of the congregation and the conscience of those investigating differ. But even if this case should occur, the congregation should nevertheless set its mind at rest and yield to the conscience of the others. We find such a balancing of duties also in the LORD Jesus. He knew quite well that Judas would receive the sacrament to his judgment, and warned him of it too; but He nevertheless admitted Judas to the sacrament, because the matter was not yet demonstrable within the circle of the disciples. The congregation imposing the ban acts not only for itself but also for the whole Church, but is therefore also obliged, if necessary, to prove its ban procedure to the Church as correct.

Closing Word of the Essayist [Schlußwort des Referenten].

We want to summarize briefly how the synods should deal with one another according to the word of the Apostle. It has already been said that the synods do not stand to one another, like states, in the relation of politics or diplomacy. This is well to be noted. Politics and diplomacy do not arise in the intercourse of individual persons, but in the intercourse of corporate bodies through their representatives. The chief factor in the intercourse of states with one another is that which Bismarck, after the French philosopher Rousseau, called "healthy egoism." For purely human relations there is a certain truth in it, but it remains after all always egoism, and that does not belong, according to Paul's words, in the intercourse of Christians with one another, nor in the intercourse of synods with one another. Christians and Christian corporate bodies should rather deal with one another in the sense of the word that each should not look on his own, but on what is another's. This results again and again from the exhortation to humility, meekness, patience, to mutual forbearance. The ecumenical spirit, which cares for the Church in general and keeps in view that it is the one body of our LORD Jesus, on which we all build together, as the various members of a body cooperate in their functions for the welfare of the whole body — this spirit must prevail in the dealings of the synods with one another, in the action of the synods together, and