# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1954_S65
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Ev. Luth. Synodical Conference of ‘North America, 1954 65

created. The chaplain, while functioning as the spiritual leader
and advising those in his charge, will have to refrain from giving
the advice that may be most necessary, the warning against false
doctrine and deviation from the Word. The parish pastor will not
give such warning to all members of heterodox churches with whom
he comes in contact, but only because such persons are not his
responsibility. But when he deals with those who are his respon-
sibility, he must reserve the right to “teach all things” (Matt. 28:20),
including the right to testify against error. The chaplain, however,
who is obligated to render certain pastoral services to those of other
denominations, must function with this right impaired and annulled.
That is unionism, church fellowship with the adherents of false
doctrine, on the highest and, consequently, the most dangerous
level — the relation of the spiritual leader with those in his charge.

In the case of public worship, Sacraments, deathbed ministra-
tion, the chaplain can and must provide, whenever possible, the
services of other chaplains and ministers who can satisfy all denom-
inational requirements. But this stipulation, far from canceling
the charge of unionism, serves only to involve further therein.
The chaplain refrains from providing certain religious ministrations
because of convictions. But he, as part of his official duties, must
insure that these ministrations of which he personally disapproves
as being contrary to God’s Word are provided for those in his
charge, and to this end he must enlist the co-operation of false
teachers of Roman, Jewish, and heterodox churches. That is union-
ism. It has been said that providing such services for those of
another faith is nothing more than an act of simple courtesy, such
as we perform when we direct a person to the nearest Roman
Church, and that the matter of confession and unionism does not
enter the picture. The two cases are, however, not identical. In the
one case we are concerned with an individual and a random
occurrence in daily life. In the other, the chaplain, as spiritual
leader of the soldiers concerned, as part of the official duties which
he is called to perform, provides through false teachers the services
that are not in accord with Scripture. It has also been said: “To
make heterodox services available to the heterodox is not the same
as giving them personal approval. The very fact that a chaplain
refuses to officiate in such capacity and enlists the service of an-
other chaplain or civilian pastor is evidence enough that he does
not approve of them.” (Another Fraternal Endeavor, p.55.) But
the chaplain’s disapproval dare not be vocal or loud and will, we
fear, be pushed into the background by his activity in providing
the service. The real point, however, is not how much disapproval
there is of what is made available, but this, that a conscientious
spiritual leader ought not to accept the call to make available to
those in his charge a ministration of which he for conscience’ sake
disapproves, and that the confessional church ought not to call him
to engage in such unionistic practice.

The Chaplaincy Involves in Unionism by Insisting on
the General Protestant Service

In the chaplaincy system the Roman and Jewish churches are
granted separate classifications, while all others are lumped to-
gether under the heading of “Protestant.” Though this arrangement
is not at all to our liking, we might be ready to accept and excuse