# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1954_S101
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Ev. Luth: Synodical Conference of North America, 1954 101

“We are firmly convinced that it is neither necessary nor
Possible to agree in all non-fundamenta] doctrines,”

Read or quoted out of its context, this sentence certainly reads
as though it sets up an altogether wrong Scriptural principle.

2. The second statement is taken from the so-called “Friendly
Invitation” extended by the Commissioners of the American Lu-

of God.” (Italics ours.)

It is this last part of the whole statement that our Wisconsin
Synod brethren take sharp exception to. Can these two statements
be taken as absolutely as our Wisconsin Synod brethren apply
them? Will you please note — and Wwe invite you to check the
correctness of every statement now made: ,

1. The context wil] show that the “non-fundamental doctrines”
and the “theological opinions” referred to were the four or five
statements mentioned in the Declaration of the A.L.C. accepted
in 1938, not non-fundamental doctrines as such. With one exception,
they deal with certain assumptions and opinions concerning certain
prophecies, which dare not be taken in a millennial sense, but
which we have always held are not to be found in the texts of the
prophecies referred to.

2. The Sandusky convention also said: “Nevertheless we are
willing to continue negotiations concerning the points termed in
our Declaration as ‘not divisive of fellowship,’ and recognized as
such by Missouri Synod resolutions. . . ,”

that statement as it read. They did not let the matter go un-
challenged.

4. As a result in 1940 the A.L.C. officially adopted the fol-
lowing explanation:

5. The “Friendly Invitation” came from A. L. C.’s Committee
on Fellowship. It Was not an official position taken by the A. L. C.,
as the Wisconsin Synod resolution of August 1951 might indicate.

6. Since this invitation came from the Fellowship Committee
of the A. L, C., our Doctrinal Unity Committee took up the matter
with them.

7. Together our Doctrinal] Committee and Fellowship Com-
jnission sc" up this fine statement found in Common Confession

» Vili, 2(7),