LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1962, Page 35

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

&

Pine antes stan aes

g
2
i
4

ERB ONG IS Da RES ID BI bE EE Gh

eee

DOCTRINAL-DEVOTIONAL ESSAYS 35

could not at the moment resolve, and it unanimously
resolved to confess this inability to agree to the District
which had posed the question. The Synod, however.
added that this was not a question of doctrine but of
casuisitry, a difficult case of conscience. This, it was
said, should not crush us, but it should humble us.

It appears that after this time for decades the mat-
ters pertaining to the question of lodge members in our
churches was little treated on the floor of what was
then called the Delegate Synod, which met every three
years after the Synod was divided into a number of
Districts, but of the Districts themselves under the
leadership of the District Presidents. While the official
organs of the Synod, Der Lutheraner and Lehre und
Wehre, and later other official publications continued to
offer instruction and warning regularly on the lodge
question, it was particularly the reports of synodical
Districts which offer reference after reference to this
matter. At times whole essays were devoted to the
subject at District conventions; more often portions of
essays dealt with it.

Since there had been some insoluble disagreement
in the Synod in 1853 and the lodge situation was evi-
dently not the same in all Districts, it appears that
matters developed differently in different Districts; par-
ticularly, they varied from congregation to congrega-
tion. Some synodical Districts were able to keep their
congregations relatively free of lodge members, while
others had far more difficulty. Also, the differences of
opinion, which had been apparent almost at the be-
ginning of the Synod — not with respect to the wrong
of lodge membership but rather with respect to the
best policy of dealing with lodge members — had re-
mained. It was the conviction of a large number of
pastors and congregations in the Synod that the policy
which counseled patient instruction had not worked
well and that patience tended to turn into procrastina-
tion and a laissez faire policy. Three quarters of a cen-
tury passed over our church without a decisive policy
on the part of the Synod.

The year 1926 marks the beginning of a change with
respect to this situation. In that year the Synod met
at St.Louis. Before the Synod were three overtures
related to lodge matters. One of these memorials asked
that the Synod discipline pastors who are lax in their
lodge practice. This same overture, submitted by a
whole synodical District, petitioned the Synod to in-
corporate the principles expressed in the overture in
appropriate resolutions of its own.

Another synodical District had submitted the follow-
ing overture: “Resolved, That we petition Synod to
declare its determination to elect only such men to
official positions as are pastors of congregations known
to be free of the lodge evil.” (Proceedings, 1926, p. 147)

A pastoral conference had submitted the following
overture: “Resolved, That no pastor of a congregation
in which lodgemen are admitted to the Lord’s table be
eligible to an executive position in Synod; and be it
furthermore Resolved, That any such pastor elected to

an executive position be held in honor bound to resign
his position.” (Proceedings, 1926, p. 147)

Because it was not possible to give these overtures
all the time for discussion that was deemed necessary,
the Synod resolved, on recommendation of the floor
committee which studied the overtures, “that the Presi-
dent of Synod appoint a committee of nine capable and
trustworthy men from various parts of Synod who shall
give these questions further study and make suitable
recommendations to Synod at its next session and thus
assure to our whole church the blessed fruits of such
continued study and discussion of this important ques-
tion; to which end also this committee all be instructed
to draw up the results of their deliberations and to
submit them to the various larger pastoral conferences
for discussion.”

The President of the Synod duly appointed the re-
quested committee of nine; the committee worked dur-
ing the triennium between 1926 and 1929 and made its
report to the Synod at River Forest in 1929. The com-
mittee reported as follows:

“Your committee, in 1927, issued a report to the
conferences dealing with the subjects referred to it
for an opinion. From the replies which your committee
received from the conferences as well as from individ-
uals, it has become clear that, while the difference con-
cerning the question whether lodge members may under
certain circumstances be admitted to Communion still
exists, there is an increasing tendency toward greater
strictness in dealing with the lodge evil and a growing
concern lest any show of tolerance lead to a gradual
breakdown of discipline in this respect. Our congrega-
tions generally hold that no one who is affiliated with
a lodge can become, be, or remain a communicant nor
a voting member of our congregations. Your committee
noted with hearty approval the many expressions warn-
ing against laxity of practice and interprets these ex-
pressions as further evidence of a strong synodical
sentiment against any compromise with the lodge evil.
Your committee agrees with a desire frequently ex-
pressed that Synod become entirely lodge-free and
hopes that the paragraphs hereinafter submitted will
be helpful in attaining that goal.” (Proceedings, 1929,
p. 115)

There follow in the Proceedings a number of reso-
lutions placed before the Synod for adoption by the
committee of nine. These were in turn placed into the
hands of a floor committee, which studied the report
and the suggested resolutions and in its turn recom-
mended certain resolutions to the Synod for adoption.
The recommended resolutions are in essence the reso-
lutions suggested by the committee of nine. We quote
as follows from the report of the floor committee:

“I. Resolved, That Synod hereby declare that it is
and shall be the practice of our Synod not to administer
Holy Communion to members of lodges;

“2. Therefore be it further resolved, That Synod,
in agreement with the resolutions of 1926, instruct its
officers to exercise vigilant care and urge all pastors