Collection › Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1958 · 45th Convention, Lakewood › Page 35
Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1958, Page 35
front matter 1
front matter 2
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 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
Scan from Albert Collver's files (LCMS President's Office / CCM)
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
Lutheran Synodical Conference, 1958 85
differences. We can only wish them Godspeed in their further
efforts. It would be ill-advised for me to comment further on
their work at this time.
However, it probably is within the province of this essay to
analyze the basic attitudes that give rise to tensions, and that
I propose to do by considering a question that has never really
become an issue in our church and probably never. will, that of
pacifism. I want to regard my discussion of it as a kind of labora-
tory experiment, as the analysis of a potential. and typical tension
motivated by the same basic views, attitudes, and emotions that
produce most controversies. Perhaps if we could watch others in
an imaginary role that vaguely resembles ours we might under-
stand each other just a trifle better, perhaps even extend the hand
of. fellowship — or the hand of farewell, if it must be —a bit more
ungrudgingly. m
Let us then imagine a longer period of peace marked by strong
currents of pacifism such as we had during the 1930’s.and then the
coming of a third world war. Let us also imagine that in a church
group somewhat like ours—we’ll call it an association — those
who believe in nonviolence and those who believe that some wars
are justifiable are about equally represented, The question they
will have to answer in their consciences is whether this particular
war is compatible with bearing witness to Christ the King. To take
a correct stand on this question will require sound judgment,
courage, and a large store of charity for those who differ in
their views. ,
Let us say that both parties consist of serious people. They
know what the Scripture says on this subject, and they have read
Luther, who expressed himself at length on it, notably in his
writings “Whether Soldiers Too Can Be Saved” (1526), “On War
Against the Turks” (1529), in the treatises concerning the Peasants’
War of 1525, and later on in those concerning the question whether
Protestant princes of the time might war against their emperor.
Luther and other Christian teachers have deduced that under
certain conditions it is right for a Christian to take up arms.
A Christian may go to war without being faithless to Christ, first,
if he is not fighting for himself but to punish an injustice or right
a grievous wrong; secondly, if the war is waged at the command
of the lawful authority of a state; thirdly, if there is no ulterior
purpose, such as gaining territory, indemnities, or privileges for
one’s own country or humiliating the other country; fourthly, if
it can be waged in the idea that it will do more good than harm;
and fifthly, if there is no attack on noncombatants and civilians.
-It seems obvious that such a righteous war has never been fought,
since there are always present certain base motives and practices;
if they do not manifest themselves at the beginning they certainly
will be brought forth by unleashing the right to kill.
I can well see that the believer in nonviolence, looking over
all these conditions, might decline to take part in this war. He
would quote the words of Christ: “Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they shall be called the children of God”; “Love your ene-
mies”; “If anyone strike you on the. right cheek, turn to him the
other also.” I have often wondered just what would happen if
a whole nation like ours did take those words of Christ seriously.
The heathen Gandhi made an attempt to do so and had pretty good