# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1954_S108
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

108 Proceedings of the Forty-Third Convention,

in the interest of members of the Missouri Synod be done by
pastors of the Missouri Synod and the spiritual welfare work in
the interests of members of the National Lutheran Council be done
by pastors of the National Lutheran Council.” That looks like
sound practice. And yet there was an agreement to admit crossing
of the lines in exceptional cases, which admittedly were of frequent
occurrence. .

The article says that it is too bad that this agreement has been’
misapplied and that people, presumably pastors, misused the
agreement and saw crises where no crisis existed. That was not
just too bad. It was inevitable that when the bars were officially
let down, there would be a liberal and easy view of what consti-
tuted an emergency.

What does this agreement say? Does it not clearly proclaim
that although a principle may be Biblical and applicable at home,
yet when exceptional cases or emergencies arise, the principle need
not apply? Must not boys of the National Lutheran Council and
of the Missouri Synod ask themselves and each other why joint
Communion is all wrong in Milwaukee but may be all right at
Camp Grant? And what of the confusion caused in the minds of
Wisconsin and Norwegian Synod boys who were not party to
the agreement? And is not similar offense caused in the case of
chaplains who, because of this official agreement, now do with an
easy conscience what previously troubled their consciences? This
is not mere co-operation in externals; this is joint spiritual wel-
fare work; and that is unionism, no matter how solemnly pastors
may be warned not to practice unionism while doing this joint
spiritual work. The Agreement justifies violation of a principle
when circumstances are unusual or exceptional.

Negotiating with Lodges

In the Missouri Synod Proceedings of 1953 the Commission on
Fraternal Organizations reported on its work during the preceding
three years. Much of the Commission’s work was no doubt very
helpful and rendered needed service to pastors who looked to it
for information regarding lodges and similar organizations.

The commissioners also report that they conducted much cor-
respondence with top officials cf various lodges. also had meetings
with them, at which they were invariably cordially received and,
“although we are not able at this time to give these organizations
a clean bill of health, we believe that we have made progress in
the direction of the goals we are trying to reach.” What those
goals are is not clearly stated, but it would seem from the context
that the ultimate goal is to be able to give these organizations
a clean bill of health.

Memorial 629 is not so hopeful of the success of these negotia-
tions, since it says: “Whereas the current expansion of lodges
exerts increasing pressure upon pastors and congregations to relax
sound Biblical principles in dealing with the lodge evil .. . be it
therefore

“Resolved, That our Commission on Fraternal Organizations
be urged to continue to put forth every effort to eliminate the
objectionable religious features in all lodges, notably the Masonic

rder.