Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1962 · 45th Convention › Page 34

LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1962, Page 34

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 86 Sheet 87 Page 88 Sheet 89 Page 90 Sheet 91 Page 92 Sheet 93 Page 94 Sheet 95 Page 98 Sheet 97 Page 98 Sheet 99 Page 160 Sheet 101 Page 102 Sheet 103 Page 104 Sheet 105 Page 106 Sheet 107 Page 108 Sheet 109 Page 110 Sheet 111 Page 112 Sheet 113 Page 114 Sheet 115 Page 116 Sheet 117 Page 118 Sheet 119 Page 120 Sheet 121 Page 122 Sheet 123 Page 124 Sheet 125 Page 126 Sheet 127 Page 128 Sheet 129 Page 130 Sheet 131 Page 132 Sheet 133 Page 134 Sheet 135 Page 136 Sheet 137 Page 138 Sheet 139 Page 140 Sheet 141 Page 142 Sheet 143 Page 144 Sheet 145 Page 146 Sheet 147 Page 148 Sheet 149 Page 150 Sheet 151 Page 152 Sheet 153 Page 154 Sheet 155 Page 156 Sheet 157 Page 158 Sheet 159 Page 160 Sheet 161 Page 162 Sheet 163 Page 164 Sheet 165 Page 166 Sheet 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 178 Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 4 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Page 200 Page 201 Page 202 Page 203 Page 204 Sheet 205 Page 6 Page 208 Page 209 Page 210 Page 211 Page 212 Page 213 Page 214 Page 215

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

34 DOCTRINAL-DEVOTIONAL ESSAYS

a number of issues, represents a dialog between two
laymen, one a member of a secret society though a con-
fessing Christian, the other strongly opposed to mem-
bership in secret societies.

The article is entitled “May a Christian Join the
So-called Secret Societies?” Most of the discussion re-
volves around the “works of love” of the members of
the secret orders. The lodge member praises his society
as being rich in works of love and criticizes the churches
for neglecting the care of the poor and needy. His
opponent charges the lodges with blowing the trumpets
to call attention to their works of love, which are
nevertheless not true works of love, because they are
limited to fellow lodge members who have not neglected
to pay their dues. Later in the article this same oppo-
nent of membership in secret societies tries to persuade
his opponent that the worship of the lodges is idolatrous.

The first major reference to our subject in a synod-
ical report is found in the Proceedings of the Seventh
Synodical Convention, held at Cleveland in the year
1853, therefore but six years after the organization of
the Synod. On page 270 of the Proceedings of this con-
vention we read under the heading “Secret Societies”:

“Synod is grieved to see that many Christians in this
country have found their way into secret societies . . .
and that more are continually being drawn into them.
The Word of God is clearly against this.”

The report then quotes passages against (a) the
secrecy of the lodges; (b) the fellowship with non-
Christians; (c) the antibiblical oath; (d) the worship
of the secret societies, which is branded idolatrous;
‘(e) the charity, falsely so called. The reference closes
with the following paragraph, which certainly indicates
an incipient policy with respect to secret societies:

“These doctrines of the Word of God, to which many
more could be added, show that anyone who joins... .
a secret lodge . . . regardless of whether he attends
the regular meetings or not, denies God, our blessed
Savior, and tramples the Word of God under foot.
Therefore the Synod warns all her members and all
Christians in general, particularly also our newly im-
migrated brethren in the faith, against these secret
societies and assumes as self-understood that in our
Christian congregations church discipline will be in-
stituted according to Matt.18 against those who are
found to be members of secret societies. At the same
time the Synod earnestly asks all her members and
Christian congregations in general to take steps to in-
stitute Christian care for the needy and sick according
to the example of the ancient church, in order to make
it easier for their members to carry on the struggle
against the rapidly spreading deception of the secret
societies.”

The difficulties of the Synod with this matter and her
continuing concern with it are highlighted by a case
described in the Synodical Proceedings of 1863, pp. 60 ff.
One of the synodical Districts had laid a troublesome
case before the Synod. The account is superscribed:
“Reception of Congregations Which Have Not Yet
Cleansed Themselves of Lodge Members.”

The question asked of the Synod by a District of
the Synod is whether a congregation, one third of whose
members are lodge members, can be received as a mem-
ber congregation by the Synod. This particular con-
gregation had passed a resolution to receive no more
lodge members and to allow no member of the con-
gregation to join a lodge. It had, however, become
necessary, not on account of willingness on the part
of the congregation to compromise with secret societies
but because the state of Christian knowledge in the
congregation was still on a low plane, to suspend these
resolutions for the time being. The question with which
the Synod was now faced was: Can such a congregation
be received into the Synod?

The discussion which ensued ‘on the floor of the
Synod, and the gist of which is reproduced in the
synodical report, indicates that there was a sharp dif-
ference of opinion among the delegates present.

The opinion on the one side is stated as follows:
“There is no doubt among us that secret societies are
a dreadful cancer of our time, and that the work of
the church suffers under it. Our Synod has always
considered it her duty to oppose this evil earnestly,
energetically, and courageously. But the correct way
to oppose this evil is not that we exclude from synodical
membership every congregation in which this evil has
not yet been overcome; it is rather to be feared that the
effect of such a procedure will be that people who have
been deceived will be hardened — will be driven from
us entirely, and that the influence of the church on such
people will be hindered completely. ... It is a fact...
that many weak and poorly instructed Christians do
not easily see the harm of membership in secret so-
cieties. How are they to learn it unless we draw them
into the circle of our influence? If such a congregation
does not openly speak and act against the confession
of the church, Synod has a sacred duty not to thrust
them away but to help the pastor to fight the evil.
But it is self-evident that a pastor who is too ignorant
to see the wrong and is himself a lodge member cannot
be received by Synod. ... It is different with laymen —
that they still belong to such societies does not auto-
matically stamp them children of the devil. True, they
must be told: You are deceived by Satan. Yet it must
be admitted: You may still be children of God... .”

One delegate who admitted that he had at one time
been very rigorous in this matter, stated that he had
learned that the more a person’s mind is enlightened by
Christian knowledge, the easier it becomes to convince
him to sever his connections with the lodge.

One who had himself been a lodge member but had
left the lodge said: “Let the District tell this congrega-
tion: We receive you, but knowing your situation with
respect to the lodge we remind you of Synod’s stand
and express the hope that you will do away with this
abomination.”

The matter was debated at great length, the one
side advocating a very evangelical approach to the lodge
member, the other demanding sterner procedure. The
Synod realized that here was a disagreement which it