Collection › Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1954 · 43rd Convention, East Detroit › Page 29
Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1954, Page 29
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 53
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 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
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
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Scan from Albert Collver's files (LCMS President's Office / CCM)
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
Ev. Luth. Synodical Conference of North America, 1954 29
in a manner satisfactory to the demands of human reason. In spite
of this divine mystery, however, the doctrine was upheld as a com-
forting article, if properly treated, i.e., if viewed in the light of
the Gospel, and particularly if sola gratia as well as gratia uni-
versalis were kept inviolate, since it afforded the glorious comfort
that no one could pluck us out of the almighty hands of Christ
and that the church of God would exist and abide in opposition to
all the gates of hell.
We mention this early historical background merely to refresh
our memories on some of the basic principles involved in this doc-
trine. A careful reading of the Formula of Concord will show how
tenaciously these fathers remained with those truths only which
were clearly revealed in Scripture, and how vigorously they re-
pudiated every type of heretical view which had arisen in con-
nection with this doctrine, so that the clearly revealed sola gratia
‘and gratia universalis of Scripture might stand side by side over
against all the attempts of human reason to investigate or inquire
curiously about a mystery which God had reserved for His wisdom
and knowledge alone.
Approaching the more recent period of Lutheranism in Amer-
ica, we find that serious aberrations from the truth of this doctrine
again became apparent. Surely we are all acquainted with the
Gnadenwahlstreit of past decades. Without even attempting to give
a detailed presentation of all the arguments, we merely wish to
present in brief the erroneous views which again cropped out. The
Ohio Synod taught in 1881 that “the elect were predestinated into
eternal life in view of faith (intuitu fidei)” (Synodical Proceedings,
1881, p.39). Faith was thereby introduced as a cause of man’s
election rather than as a result. Election was made dependent in
the last analysis on the conduct of natural man, which God had
foreseen from eternity. The old Iowa conception of predestination
as defined by Dr. S. Fritschel differed somewhat from this, to the
extent that he discarded the intuitu fidei theory and defined election
as the universal gracious will of God as far as it was realized in
them that were saved. In the end it was also nothing more than
an election in view of the different conduct of natural man. The
fact that one could speak of a “different conduct on the part of
man” presented no problem, as we have seen in the distinction
between natural and willful resistance in our treatment of the
article on Conversion. Both Iowa and Ohio maintained that to
describe faith as a result rather than a cause of election was
a Calvinistic conception. They also took violent exception to the
teaching of Scripture and the Confessions that God elected or
ordained a specific number of persons unto faith and eternal life
(Personenwahl, Form. Conc., XI, par. 23), calling Dr. Walther’s
statements in support of this doctrine a horrible doctrine (Allwardt,
Die jetzige Lehre der Synode von Missouri von der Gnadenwahl
Gottes, 1909, p.36). They could not understand how God should
have elected a number of human beings without seeing something
in them to cause this decree. Not that they went so far as to say
that man’s refraining from willful resistance could be considered
a cause in man or an act of co-operation on the part of man. God’s
universal will of grace extended to all men. This will of God’s
grace, they firmly maintained, is carried out by the Holy Ghost
alone, who without co-operation on the part of natural man over-