# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1962_S178
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

COMMITTEE 3 177

It is preferable to separate this doctrinal matter from
the various doctrinal statements referred to, whether
they be doctrinal statements adopted during the past
115 years of the Synod’s history or whether they may be
adopted in the future.

Theoretically it is possible that a “doctrinal statement
of a confessional nature adopted by Synod as a true ex-
position of the Holy Scriptures” may turn out to be
unscriptural.

As a matter of historical fact, the so-called Common
Confession, in the opinion of not a few members of the
Synod, is unscriptural. It is well known that both the
Wisconsin Synod and the Evangelical Lutheran Synod
have strenuously objected to this particular “doctrinal
statement of a confessional nature adopted by Synod.”

It is not wise to bring into this clarification of the
Synod’s position any reference to future doctrinal state-
ments “of a confesisonal nature adopted by Synod as
a true exposition of the Holy Scriptures.”

It is not at all impossible that such a statement may
in the future be “adopted as a true exposition of the
Holy Scriptures” and yet upon closer examination be
found to be unscriptural. This has happened to the sects
with their sectarian confessional documents. Though
such sectarian documents were “adopted as a true ex-
position of the Holy Scriptures,” faithful Lutherans have
had to declare these sectarian confessional documents
to be unscriptural.

It is useful, however, to set forth the teaching of
Scripture in regard to the Christian’s duty to acknowl-
edge: When a Christian competent to judge comes face
to face with a doctrinal statement that is Scriptural,
then it is his duty to acknowledge that the statement in
question is Scriptural.

There are some doctrinal statements which are Scrip-
tural but with which the average member of our Synod
is not acquainted. There are such Scriptural statements
belonging to an earlier period of history; and there are
also such Scriptural statements written in strange lan-
guages of today. For this reason a person competent
to judge if he had the doctrinal statement in his own
language, could not form an independent judgment for
the simple reason that he has not come face to face with
the particular doctrinal statement, Scriptural though it
may be.

There are also Christians among us who are not
competent to judge whether a Scriptural statement
adopted by the Synod is or is not Scriptural. Among
these are infants and the mentally incompetent.

So we cannot claim that every Christian ought to
acknowledge that every Scriptural document is Scrip-
tural. We are on solid Scriptural ground, however, if
we say: When a Christian competent to judge, comes
face to face with a doctrinal statement that is Scriptural,
it is his duty to acknowledge that the statement in
question is Scriptural.

Accordingly, the undersigned respectfully petitions
the Synod to set forth the teachings of Scripture on this
subject within the general limits of the Scripture teach-
ings referred to hereinafter.

1. Scripture Teaching

a) General principle: When a Christian competent
to judge comes face to face with a doctrinal statement
that is Scriptural, then it is his duty to acknowledge
that the statement in question is Scriptural.

b) Application:
1) Positively: Every Christian competent to judge

ought to be willing to say promptly and cheerfully that
he approves of this general principle.

2) Negatively:
aa) It would be sinful for him to seek to hide his

opinion as to whether or not the statement in question
is Scriptural.

bb) If he is asked for his opinion, it would he sinful
to refuse to acknowledge that the statement in question
is Scriptural.

ce) It would be sinful to teach contrary to the state-
ment in question.

2. The Reasons for This Scriptural Teaching Are Clear

a) The Lord Jesus teaches that He will confess be-
fore His Father only those who confess Him before men
and that He will deny those who deny Him before men.
(Matt. 10: 32, 33)

The Word with which He has entrusted us must in
every case be openly acknowledged as His Word. We
are not permitted to deny that some part of His Word
has His approval; we are not permitted to deny that it
is Scriptural; we are not permitted to sit on the fence.
He who here is not with Christ is against Him, denies
Him. When we come face to face with a word of Christ
or with a statement based on a word of Christ, we must
acknowledge that it is Scriptural.

b) The apostle Peter points out our duty to confess
Christ and His Word: “Be ye ready always to ‘give an
answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the
hope that is in you.” (1 Peter 1:15)

Evasion, neutrality, opposition is ruled out. When
the question is asked: Is this what you believe? then
we must confess either that we believe that which is
Scriptural or that we do not believe that which is un-
scriptural.

c) Whenever another person has taken his stand on
Scripture, it is our duty to take our stand alongside
him, confessing openly that his position is Scriptural.
We see this from the teaching of St. Paul: “Be not thou
therefore ashamed of the testimony of our Lord nor of
me his prisoner; but be thou partaker of the afflictions
of the Gospel.” (2 Tim. 1:8)

d) When a doctrinal statement is Scriptural, the
Christian is not permitted to let his old Adam, his weak
flesh, dictate what he should say or what he should not
say about the Scripturalness of the statement in ques-
tion. On the contrary, when he is faced with a question
regarding the Scripturalness of such a doctrinal state-
ment, then he must be guided by the Holy Spirit’s pre-
cept: “If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles
of God.” (1 Peter 4:11)