# Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1958_S21 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) i inn i Ae a ie fel a Lutheran Synodical Conference, 1958 21 ism. Purity of religion was to be the means —the “schoolmaster” —-to bring them to Christ. They made it an end in itself, boast- ing of their own self-righteousness and superiority as sons of Abraham instead of humbling themselves to receive the Messiah, whom they themselves had foretold. Then when He came, they failed to recognize Him. This is certainly one of the major ironies of history. They had never learned what the servant in the par- able was to learn to his sorrow: that you can’t keep a treasure by burying it; or what Paul taught in 1Corinthians 13: “Though I have the gift of prophecy and understand all mysteries and all knowledge .. . and have not charity, I am nothing.” With all their noble qualities, they were sadly lacking in lovable traits and wide sympathies. George Santayana (in his book The Idea of Christ in the Gospels) puts his finger on their trouble when he writes: It is indeed one of the beauties of Christ that in spite of His absolute holiness, or because of it, He shows a spontaneous sym- pathy, shocking to the Pharisee, with many nonreligious sides of life, with little children, with birds and flowers, with com- mon people, with beggars with sinners, with sufferers of all sorts, even with devils. This is one of the proofs that natural spirit, not indoctrinated or canalized, was speaking in Him. The scribes and Pharisees were enmeshed in their own dogma, shackled by that which should have made them free. That has been the plight of the scribe and the Pharisee of every age, for it would be a mistake to think that their. type has disappeared from the earth. “The most scathing denunciations to fall from the lips of the gentle Savior,” writes L. Nelson Bell in Christianity Today, “were reserved for these men who knew the letter of the Law but whose hearts and lives were so far from the truth.” There is an ominous warning in all this for those who are one-sidedly preoccupied with purity of doctrines. Orthodoxy and confessionalism are fine ideals, and we would not want to depart from them. But let us beware of making them ends in them- selves rather than means toward the end which supersedes all others, that of winning souls for Christ. Let us beware of the sins of pride, uncharitableness,. and exclusiveness, with which the evil one waylays those who cherish the purity of doctrine. In this connection I should like to offer two quotations. The one is a sentence from an otherwise laudatory article in the April 7, 1958, issue of Time magazine: As for theological liberalism of the early 20th century, it barely touched Lutherans at all. But the Lutherans’ position apart had its disadvantages too. Snug, smug, and embattled in their mighty fortresses called synods, they often looked down not only on their fellow Christians but on fellow Lutherans as well. The other quotation is again from the layman L. Nelson Bell, who writes on the subject “Orthodoxy Can Be Deadly” in the widely circulated magazine Christianity Today. He says: I believe that the cause of Christ has suffered greatly at the hands of those who, proclaiming their orthodoxy to the skies, have shown themselves totally lacking in Christian love, courtesy, and forbearance. The Apostle Paul writes, “And the servant - of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, forbearing,” but often we who regard orthodoxy so important fail to heed this warning.