LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1973, Page 29

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

MINUTES OF THE CONVENTION 29

Dr. Temme then introduced Rev. John D. Erickson
who is in charge of church relations for the American
Bible Society. Since The Lutheran Church — Missouri
Synod contributes to the work of the society he felt
that the delegates should know what is being done to
help in the distribution of the Scriptures and should
receive a report on stewardship of the monies which
were given. In his report he thanked the Synod for its
help and pointed out the three major tasks which con-
front the American Bible Society. These are the need
for translation, the need for printing, and the need for
distribution of the Scriptures. At the present time
32 translation consultants are working with 3,000 trans-
Jators in many different places. The American Bible So-
ciety is also attempting to put out the Scripture in an
appealing format. It is distributed throughout the world
with the exceptions of North Korea, North Vietnam,
and Albania.

Constitutional Matters

In resuming discussion of Resolution 5-03 (TB 64)
Chairman Nieting of the Committee on Constitutional
Matters reminded the delegates that they were adopt-
ing the resolveds and not the whereases of the resolu-
tion. He stated his conviction that if the convention
could not vote on doctrinal issues the Synod could not
remain a confessional church. If one does not, for con-
science sake, accept the conclusions of the Synod, there
are proper procedures to be followed in making his
concerns known.

He also called on Dr. August Suelflow, director of
the Concordia Historical Institute, to explain the past
practices of the Synod with regard to doctrinal resolu-
tions. Dr. Suelflow stated that an interpretation of Arti-
cle VIII requires an understanding of the past history
of our Synod.

A lay member of the committee presented what he
described as a layman’s point of view. He stated that
in his opinion the Synod has not only the right but the
duty to make decisions regarding doctrine. In his view,
the ongoing life of the congregations requires decisions
of this nature.

After this presentation the committee proposed a
change in the whereases of the resolution so that the
words “Those who recognize the true doctrine” in lines
4 and 5 (TB 65) would read “who agrees with the doc-
trine and who does not.” The chair ruled on the basis
of a call for a point of order that amendments to the
whereases were not to be discussed until the resolveds
have been amended and adopted. In the discussion
which ensued a motion to change number 2 of the re-
solved so that it would read “Voting on matters of doc-
trine and conscience shall be understood as the Synod
seeking only to state its present understanding of the
doctrine set forth in the Word of God with no judgment
intended on those who disagree” was introduced. After
some discussion the question was called since the time
for discussion according to the standing rules of the
convention had expired. The chair ruled that the call
for the question had been adopted. However, respond-

ing to a point of order the chair ruled that debate would
continue for 15 minutes because the committee pre-
sentation at the beginning of the discussion had con-
sumed that amount of time. At this point a motion was
made from the floor to call the question. Upon sugges-
tion of the chair delegates agreed to vote immediately
on the amendment and devote 15 minutes to continued
discussion of the resolution. The amendment was de-
clined.

In the continuing discussion a motion was made to
amend the resolution substituting for lines 36 to 43 of
TB, page 65, the following words "Resolved, 1. That the
Synod reaffirm its historic position that matters of doc-
trine and conscience shall not be established by a ma-
jority vote, but 2. That all such matters shall be decided
only by the Word of God consistent with the Synod’s
historic practice.” This amendment was also declined
as was a motion to call the question regarding the en-
tire Resolution 5-03. By a voice vote the convention
decided not to extend the time of the session for the
further discussion of the resolution at this point.

Closing

Dr. Wiederaenders alerted the delegates to the pos-
sibility of evening sessions for the next two days of
the convention. If they are necessary the schedule
would call for adjournment at 9:00 p.m. on Tuesday
and 10:00 p.m. on Wednesday. The session concluded
with a hymn and with prayer led by Miss Kathy Ditt-
man.

Session 6

July 10, Morning
Opening

The sixth convention session began with an opening
devotion led by Mr. David Adam and included the
presentation of another segment of the convention essay
by Dr. August Suelflow. In his presentation he asked
how often do we go beyond the photographs of our
ancestors to their life of love? Sometimes we assume
that they had no problems. However, the history of
their activity does not bear this out. Prior to their
coming to America and before the organization of the
Synod there were three major pressures which con-
fronted these people. These were the pressures of or-
thodoxy, pietism, and rationalism. In Europe the con-
fessional Lutherans began to hold services in private
homes to avoid rationalism. In these services laymen
were often called upon to preach. The organization of
a holy club at the University of Leipzig with its empha-
sis on emotion was a reaction to the rationalistic move-
ment. The fathers of the future Missouri Synod were
concerned for maintaining their faith in the midst of
these pressures.

Dr. Suelflow stated that it is a myth that the initia-
tive for the organization of the Synod came from the
Saxons who arrived in America in 1839. It rather came
from groups of pastors who were dissatisfied with the
linguistic and confessional standards of their own
groups.