Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1954, Page 40

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

40 Proceedings of the Forty-Third Convention,

Surely not one of us would have this happen to him; not one
of us desires to cause dissension and division in doctrine withir
the true, professing church of Jesus Christ or within our Synodical
Conference. None of us would willingly and knowingly lift his
voice to help Satan in such an effort. Therefore it behooves us all
earnestly, prayerfully, and in the fear of God to weigh as objec-
tively as we can all that has been said and is being said either fox
or against any position taken by any of us in the matters now in
controversy between us.

It must be evident to all of us by now that the Common Con-
fession will hardly remain for long an article of agreement between
The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod and the American Lu-
theran Church. The present move by which a new church body
is being formed, and of which the American Lutheran Church in
all likelihood will be a party, has changed the picture. Dr. Behnken
has already called this to the attention of our brethren of the
Honorable Synod of Wisconsin at the conference of Presidents and
District Presidents (or their representatives) which met in Mil-
waukee, May 11—14, 1954, and recently again has referred to it
in the Lutheran Witness (LXXIII [July 20, 1954], 250) when he
said: “It surely was made clear to representatives of the Wisconsin
Synod that we have not declared fellowship with the American
Lutheran Church, that the Common Confession, Part II, has not
been adopted, that agreement has not been reached on such issues
of church practice as fellowship unionism, separatism, and anti-
Christian organizations. It was also made clear that the present
negotiations toward a merger of the American Lutheran Church,
the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Norwegian), the United Evan-
gelical Lutheran Church (Danish), and the Lutheran Free Church
(Norwegian) on the basis: of A United Testimony on Faith and
Life, a document of agreement between these bodies, definitely
enters into consideration. Such a merger would set aside the
Common Confession as a document for future fellowship. There
would no longer be an American Lutheran Church, but a new
body. We have also told the brethren that we are not fully in
agreement with A United Testimony on Faith and Life.” (Em-
phases ours.)

In view of the fact, then, that the Common Confession will
very likely and in the near future be set aside as a document of
agreement between The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod and
the American Lutheran Church, why should it continue to be the
subject of discussion and even possible dissension at this con-
vention? Why not, without further discussion, simply set it aside
at once and so eliminate all dispute concerning it?

It is because the issues before us are not that simple. The
accusations made against the Common Confession are of such a
nature that they must be faced. If it is true, as some have claimed,
that the Common Confession actually fails to confess the true
doctrine or that it allows error to stand, then merely, without
further discussion, to set aside this document would not be sat-
isfactory. And if the 1950 adoption of the Common Confession in
good faith can be shown to have been indeed a denial of the truth
or a compromise with error, then for The Lutheran Church —