# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1954_S68
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

68 Proceedings of the Forty-Third Convention,

' The best answer to the suggestion that times of emergency
may excuse a deviation from normal and wholesome practice has
been given by the President of the Missouri Synod. In 1942, at
Columbus, Ohio, he remarked in connection with joint Communion
services with those of other Lutheran bodies, “Are we expected to
sacrifice principles in an emergency?” (Cf. Quartalschrift,
Oct. 1942.) With this statement we agree. We see no reason
and no excuse for the “Articles of Agreement.” After all argu-
ments regarding exceptional nature, worthy motive, and perilous
times have been offered, the basic fact still remains that these
Articles provide for a unionistic administration of the Lord’s
Supper.

Abhorrence of unionism, concern for the principle of separation
of Church and State and regard for the divinity of the call, compel
us of the Wisconsin Synod to take this stand against the military
chaplaincy. We take this stand without doubting that many a
chaplain may be able to report heart-warming experiences he
has had, especially in his dealings with fellow believers or the
unchurched, but also without forgetting that harm and havoc will
be wrought whenever the Lord’s will and Word are disregarded.
We abide by this stand without being swayed by any listing of
results or by any proofs that the chaplaincy system is more effec-
tive than a mailing program, for we deem such considerations be-
side the point. We want to make every sacrifice possible for those in
the Armed Forces, but always in the spirit that bows humbly to the
word “To obey is better than sacrifice” (1Sam.15:22). We need
not fear that the Lord will hold us accountable for results that
could not be achieved on the pathway of obedience. But we have
every reason to fear that He will hold us responsible for any harm
that comes to the Church now or later through wavering in con-
_victions that rest on God’s Word and through departure from His
ways. We bring to the attention of the sister synod the stand
we have taken and the reasons for it in the fervent hope that
they might join us there and stand with us in regard to the military

chaplaincy. SCOUTING

Scouting, the second subject treated in this paper, has been
a controversial subject in the Synodical Conference especially
since 1944, when the Missouri Synod resolved “that the matter of
Scouting should be left to the individual congregation to decide”
(Missouri Proceedings, 1944, p. 257), with the result that the num-
ber of church troops in our circles and the difficulties of those who
opposed the movement increased rapidly and markedly. The
chaplaincy controversy has extended over more years, but the
Scouting problem, because it reaches into the inner working of the
Christian congregation and the Christian home, has engendered
more deliberations, discussions, dealings, and disagreements on con-
gregational, conference, synod, and Synodical Conference level.
The Wisconsin Synod ought not to be considered impatient and
premature if it insists that a major effort be made to deal with,
and dispose of, the problem, in view of the fact that postponement
will allow for the spread of Scouting in our Church and will serve
to increase unrest over what is a very real and practical problem
for many congregations.