# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1969_S517 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 506 “WHAT IS A DOCTRINE?” monies not commanded by God, as long as there is mutual agreement in [the] doctrine and in all its articles. . . .29 Sometimes the term carries the added emphasis that such Biblical teachings are not the product of rational proof and demonstration but are held by virtue of a faith wrought by the Holy Spirit. This is its primary emphasis in the following contemporary statement: With the whole true Church of God we confess the Bible to be the inerrant Word of God. This inerrancy of the Holy Scriptures cannot be seen with human eyes, nor can it be proved to human reason; it is an article of faith, a belief in something that is hidden and not obvious. . . 30 Later 17th-century dogmaticians, following the ex- ample of Nicholas Hunnius, made various distinctions within the articles of faith. For them, fundamental articles are those doctrines of Scripture which pertain to the fundamentum, or foundation, of saving faith: the forgiveness of sins in Jesus Christ. Primary fundamental articles (for example, the person and work of Christ) are in their view constitutive for saving faith and can be neither unknown nor denied without the loss of sal- vation. Secondary fundamental articles (for example, Holy Baptism and the Lord’s Supper) they regarded as related to the foundation of saving faith but in such a way that persons may be ignorant of them and still possess saving faith. For them, nonfundamental articles are Scriptural teachings which do not directly touch the foundation of faith and on that account may be unknown or even denied without destroying saving faith, provided such a denial does not result from a conscious opposition to Holy Scripture. The dogmaticians generally included in this category such doctrines as the sin against the Holy Ghost and the doctrine of angels. For the dogmaticians, both fundamental and non- fundamental articles are Scriptural doctrines. Questions not answered conclusively by the Scriptures were termed “open questions” or “theological problems.” This somewhat complex classification of the articles of faith was primarily intended to emphasize the greater im- portance of certain Biblical doctrines for the faith of the Christian. Teaching The term “teaching” is essentially an Anglo-Saxon synonym of the Latin derivative “doctrine.” Its usage is somewhat less technical than that of the term “doc- trine.” The Random House Dictionary of the English Language defines “teaching” as follows: 1. the act or profession of one who teaches. 2. that which is taught. 3. Often, teachings, doctrines or precepts. Other standard dictionaries of the English language de- fine the term similarly. IM. Conclusions and Applications 1. The statement and comments adopted by the two 29 Formula of Concord, Epitome, X, 7; Tappert, p. 493. 30 “Theses on Scripture and Inspiration” of The Evangelical Lutheran Church of Australia, as quoted in Report of the Com- mission on Theology and Church Relations, A Study Document on Revelation, Inspiration, Inerrancy, p. 15. seminary faculties in 1956 (see above) remain a sound and useful answer to the question “What Is a Doctrine?” 2. In the New Testament and the Lutheran Confes- sions “the doctrine” generally denotes the entire Chris- tian doctrine viewed as a whole. As used in the ques- tion “What Is a Doctrine?” the terms “a doctrine” or “doctrines” reflect the atomistic usage current since the 17th century. Used in this way, “a doctrine” denotes a part of the whole Biblical teaching on Christian faith and life which is distinguished from the whole for purposes of teaching or discussion. 3. No matter how skillfully or logically we divide the whole Christian doctrine into convenient parts, or “doc- trines,” it is important for us to remember that the one doctrine God gave us is an organic whole. Therefore only that which is part of this one doctrine can claim the status of “a doctrine” in the Christian church. Moreover, Christians will seek to study the various parts in the light of the whole and as belonging to the whole. Such a practice will help “minister to sound doctrine.” (2 Tim. 4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1) 4. Because the Lutheran Church is pledged to “the prophetic and apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments as the pure and clear fountain of Israel,” 3! she recognizes as a valid articulation of the Christian doctrine only that which is a formulation of the pure and clear teaching of Holy Scripture, the inspired Word of God. Teachings contrary to or improperly drawn from Holy Scripture must be rejected. 5. A mistaken exegesis of a passage or section of Scripture does not constitute a false doctrine, provided it does not conflict with any part of the Christian doc- trine. However, incorrect exegesis may indeed lead to false doctrine. 6. Isagogical judgments, that is, statements dealing with the authorship and background of Biblical books, are not in themselves “doctrine” or “doctrines” but aids to the better understanding of Scripture. While incor- rect isagogical judgments are not in themselves false doctrines, it must be remembered that such judgments dare not set aside or call into question the authority of Scripture. For then they endanger not only individual Christian doctrines but the whole Christian doctrine. 7. In seeking to determine what is included in the doctrinal agreement necessary for the establishment of pulpit and altar fellowship, the church should be guided by the following statement from the Augsburg Con- fession: It is sufficient for the true unity of the Christian church that the Gospel be preached in conformity with a pure understanding of it and that the sacraments be adminis- tered in accordance with the divine Word.32 The Augsburg Confession makes the preaching of the Gospel according to a pure understanding of it and the administration of the sacraments in accordance with the divine Word the only absolute doctrinal demands for 31 Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, The Summary Form- ulation, etc., 3; Tappert, p. 503. 32 Augsburg Confession, VII, 2; Tappert, p. 32.