The claim which some have made, that the Missouri Synod in recent years has changed position doctrinally, while our former opponents now hold the same position as was originally held by the Missouri Synod, will be considered ridiculous by all except those who try to find some balm for their conscience in this way. ``The Norwegian Lutheran Church'' apparently stands in the most friendly relations to all Lutherans except those who formerly fraternized with the Norwegian Synod. It is a matter of frequent occurrence that members of this church body fraternize even with the Reformed without being made object of church discipline. This is certainly as far removed from the position held by the old Norwegian Synod as it possible can be.
Lay preaching activity is carried on in the Norwegian Lutheran Church, pretty much in the same way as among the former opponents of the Norwegian Synod. True, a few individuals have voiced their protest against the practice, but there is no indication of any general opposition. Concern for the preservation of the sovereignty of the local church has ceased; they seem to have no more use for a clear proviso, stating that the resolutions of the church body have only advisory significance.
It is true that a series of theses on important doctrines has been adopted, in which the second fundamental principle of the Reformation seems to have been adhered to. But even these theses are sadly defective. A serious fault is the lack of definite anti-theses rejecting the false doctrines which were formerly advocated by the opponents. In the theses on election, the so-called second form, which designates faith and perseverance as the ``necessary prerequisite'' of election, is correlated with the definition found in Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions; and unreserved acknowledgment to this presentation is required of all the members of the Church. While the expression, ``The good conduct of man,'' which was used by the opponents in the controversy in the eighties, has been rejected, the idea which it was intended to convey is still preserved, in the expression, ``man's feeling of responsibility when face to face with the acceptance of grace.'' Yes, the definition of the doctrine of Election given by the Formula of Concord is beclouded by the misleading reference to the Confessions which is made in paragraph 3 of ``Opgjør.''
And yet, what would it have availed, even if these theses had been entirely, correct, as long as all parties entered the union with the understanding that their former doctrinal position remains intact? They continue to teach and preach as they did before. The view on Absolution formerly held by the Hauge Synod has even been officially recognized. That there is the greatest confusion in their conception of the gospel and of the doctrine of Justification by faith alone, crops out continually at the circuit meetings in all parts of the church body.
Chiliastic errors, which have been definitely rejected by the Norwegian Synod in its early history, are held and advocated by many of the members. In the course of the discussions, Chiliasm has been considered an open question.
The establishing of Christian day schools has found no place on the future program of the ``Norwegian Lutheran Church.'' The schools that were operating when the union was effected have all since then been discontinued. The official organs of the church have repeatedly branded all attempts to establish such schools as futile. The whole matter is now no doubt by all considered a back number.
Testimony against lodgery has almost ceased. Several articles on the subject have been refused publication by the official organs of the church. Congregations having a paragraph against lodge membership in their constitutions have one after another had the paragraphs removed, with the result that not only have persons with lodge connections been accepted, but old members have quite generally joined the lodges.
There is hardly anyone now who dares to make the claim publicly, that the Norwegian Lutheran Church holds the same position in doctrine and practice as the old Norwegian Synod. The great majority of that church body would, no doubt, greatly resent it if such a claim were made.