# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1941_S283
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Intersynodical and Doctrinal Matters 288

‘unionism’ is concerned, our standpoint is publicly stated, and as
membership in lodges, the difference is hardly so great as some
Referring to prayer-fellowship, we are still convinced that
er-fellowship is wider than church-fellowship; but we do
onsider this difference as church-divisive and believe in the
‘se. of time it will be overcome completely.”

‘Our commission still is of the opinion that the situation with
pect to the practical questions touched on here is such at
sent that unless greater harmony is attained, there would be
end of friction and irritation if church-fellowship should be
Stablished between our two bodies. With respect to prayer-fellow-
Ship we state as our position what we stated to the American
utheran Church commissioners: ‘Generally speaking, prayer-
llowship involves church-fellowship. There may be cases, how-
ver, where the question whether common prayer means fellowship
elongs to the field of casuistry.”

f) On the relations of the American Lutheran Church to the
United Lutheran Church of America the American Lutheran
* Church Convention Report states:

“1, We thank God that our commissioners were instrumental
in bringing about the Pittsburgh Agreement.

“2. We accept the Pittsburgh Agreement with a definite con-
viction that this agreement is in complete harmony with the
Declaration and the Brief Statement.

“3. We rejoice that the United Lutheran Church, assembled
at Omaha in convention, approved the Pittsburgh Agreement and
consider this an évidence of the strength of conservative Lutheran-
ism in the United Lutheran Church of America.

“4. We feel confident that the action taken by the United
Lutheran Church will be reflected in all its official publications, in
the teaching of its seminaries, in its preaching and instruction,
that such action will strengthen the practical life and discipline
of both our church-bodies.

“5 We encourage the pastors of the United Lutheran Church
and our cwn Church to meet in smaller groups and to discuss
questions of doctrine and practice in order to understand each
other’s view and to strengthen each other.”

It will be seen from this that the American Lutheran Church
Convention endorsed the Pittsburgh Agreement, which in our
view is inadequate.

g) Finally, with respect to both the United Lutheran Church
of America and the Missouri Synod, the Detroit Convention says:

“While rejoicing in the progress made in the negotiations
between our American Lutheran Church and the Missouri Synod,
\