The Norwegian Synod began very early in its history to assume a decidedly definite attitude toward the other Lutheran bodies in this country. In 1855, two years after the organization of the Synod, when the question of training future pastors and teachers was discussed, two of the pastors, Ottesen and Brandt, were delegated to acquaint themselves with the various Lutheran synods for the purpose of finding an educational institution to which our Synod might send its young men, who wished to be trained for work in the church. The report submitted by these delegates is most clear and enlightening. They found in the older synods much that was not in harmony with true Lutheran doctrine and practice. They would not recommend to our Synod to affiliate with the Ohio, or the Iowa Synods. The Missouri Synod, on the other hand, was found to he thoroughly faithful to the Lutheran Confessions; they therefore urged the Norwegian Synod to seek affiliation with that Synod. In accordance with their recommendation, the educational institutions of the Missouri Synod were used for many years for the training of our workers. And the most cordial relations existed between this Synod and the Norwegian Synod up to the merger of 1917.
In this connection it may he of interest to note the opinion of the various Lutheran synods voiced by President H. A. Preus in his ``Seven Lectures'' on conditions in the Lutheran Church in America, delivered in Norway in 1866. He says: ``The Lutheran General Synod in America is composed of more than twenty component synods, among them there are such that do not even pretend to accept the Lutheran Confessions. In recent years, however, a more genuinely Lutheran stand has been taken by some among them. This position has been championed chiefly by the old Pennsylvania Synod. ... However, the greater portion of the General Synod still represents the so-called `American Lutheranism' in contrast to the old German orthodoxy which they consider obsolete.''
Later on President Preus says: ``The Ohio Synod, which is partly German and partly English, has subscribed unreservedly to the Lutheran Confessions, it is true, yet it has proved to be very lax in doctrine and practice. It has, among other things, experienced severe internal conflicts because of the fact that many of its pastors belong to the Masonic and other secret orders.'''
``The German Iowa Synod, whose first pastors without exception were followers of Wilhelm Loehe of Bavaria, champions his Romanizing and Chiliastic errors, a fact which has been the cause of many withdrawals.'' About the Buffalo Synod the Rev. H. A. Preus has this to say: ``Their doctrine and practice touching the office of the ministry and church government were Romanizing to such a degree that not only their congregations were subjected to the tyrannical yoke of the clergy, but the majority of their pastors were likewise held under the yoke of `Seniors' who ruled like popes.''
``Against these more or less un-Lutheran synods, as well as against the German Reformed and Catholic church bodies, the Missouri Synod has continually contended with as much courage and efficiency as with faithfulness to the Confessions. Before all these it has unfurled the banner of true Lutheranism clearly, gloriously, and brilliantly. Though every hand has been directed against it on that account, though it has been subjected to scorn, ridicule and persecution on all sides, the Missouri Synod has nevertheless continued to cling unflinchingly to `God's word and Luther's doctrine.' And God has not withheld His blessing from this conflict. After controversy extending over a period of more than twenty years, the Buffalo Synod last year admitted that the Missouri Synod was right in its contentions, and has now sought to affiliate with it. ... The withdrawal from the General Synod which, as already stated, occurred a year ago was no doubt brought about as a result of the clear testimony borne by the Missouri Synod.''
Having withdrawn from the General Synod, the Pennsylvania Synod began to negotiate with a number of other synods for the purpose of forming a conservative Lutheran federation. These negotiations resulted in the founding of the General Council. However, neither the Missouri Synod nor the Norwegian Synod deemed it advisable to join with these heterogeneous elements, which moreover gave very little promise of firmness in doctrine and practice for the future. By reading the comments on the work of the General Council printed in ``Kirkelig Maanedstidende'' during the first years of its history, we need not be in doubt about the attitude of the Norwegian Synod toward this federation.
On the other hand, negotiations were begun by the Missouri Synod, the Norwegian Synod and a few other bodies, among them the Ohio Synod, for the purpose of forming a federation of really faithful Lutherans. This led to the formation of the Lutheran Synodical Conference, in 1872. True, the Norwegian Synod withdrew from the Synodical Conference in 1883. This, however, was not done because of any disagreement in doctrine, but simply because many thereby hoped to avoid a schism in the Norwegian Synod during the controversy on Election. The Norwegian Synod continued, in spite of its formal withdrawal, to enjoy the most intimate fraternal relations with the Synodical Conference until the merger of 1917. It continued to work in perfect harmony with the synods of the Synodical Conference, while it did not fraternize with any Lutheran synod outside of this body. We need but call to mind that a number of our pastors and professors during the last part of this period received the degree of Doctor of Theology from the faculties at St. Louis and Wauwatosa, and that leading men of the Missouri and Wisconsin Synods were created Doctors of Theology by our faculty. The relation to all other Lutheran synods was always more or less strained because of disagreement in doctrine and practice. We see, then, how conscientiously the Norwegian Synod always sought to avoid all unionism and affiliated only with those Lutherans with whom it was in perfect agreement in doctrine and practice.