# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S302
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

302

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
ii. It does not seem appropriate to impose our synod’s history or church orders upon Lutheran church bodies in other
countries, or to view them through the lenses of the histories of Lutheran churches in North America (e.g., Germans
and Norwegians with reference to the Formula of Concord).
Where we do not share histories of theological disagreement
or controversy (especially with “emerging church bodies”),
it may be more appropriate to begin with the assumption that
we are in confessional agreement with those who have subscribed unconditionally to the entire Book of Concord until
we are shown otherwise. In cases where an emerging church
body does not have vernacular access to the entire Book of
Concord, a similar assumption of agreement may be in order
with those who have subscribed only to the parts of the Book
of Concord which are available to them. Finally, in cases
where a church body has chosen not to subscribe to a confessional writing (such as the Formula of Concord), we should
seek to determine whether the reason for non-subscription
has more to do with custom or history before simply assuming that it represents substantive, doctrinal disagreement
(e.g., churches which were planted by Scandinavian missionaries and which are in agreement with the teachings of
the entire Book of Concord, without formally subscribing to
the entire book).
b. The need for a variety of mechanisms for assessing
confessional agreement with “emerging church bodies” or
church bodies in their formative stages.
i. In the United States, Lutheran church bodies often developed similar structures in order to take into account the separation of church and state as well as the need to rely upon the
volunteerism of its lay members. Moreover, Lutheran church
bodies have developed structures and formulated theological
positions over a period of many decades, resulting in parallel commissions and officials to meet with each other when
they enter into dialogue. Typically, these entities then take
the results back to the respective church bodies for approval
by their church-wide assemblies or conventions. In addition,
because of their past histories, they may have documents and
established theological positions that serve as starting points
for dialogue.
ii. In dealing with younger church bodies outside the United
States, many of which are either developing different structures or already have structures that do not parallel our own,
a different method of assessing confessional agreement is
needed. Three methods in particular come to mind. First,
LCMS representatives could visit the congregations and
theological institutions (if they exist) in that church body for
doctrinal discussions and in order to hear what is being actually preached and taught. This may reveal that confessional
agreement exists. Second, documents that our church body
has produced and adopted could be shared for study, and we
should study any materials they might have to offer, to see
whether either church body has any objections or disagreements. Third, the church body could be asked to prepare
brief statements of doctrine and descriptions of practice for
consideration by the LCMS.
c. The need for different procedures by which a relationship of
altar and pulpit fellowship is “declared” or recognized by the
LCMS.
i. In the United States a formal declaration of church fellowship by the LCMS in convention has followed formal dialogues and a recommendation by the CTCR for entering into
altar and pulpit fellowship. This approach has assumed a history of confessional and theological differences that had to
be resolved. This has also typically been the case in the history of Lutheranism in North America and Western Europe.
ii. In dealing with emerging or recovering Lutheran churches in
other parts of the world, there frequently is little or no history
of theological differences or division. In such circumstances,
something other than a formal declaration of church fellowship by the Synod in convention may be appropriate, given
differences in structure and differing states of theological
development. Many of these Lutherans work from the as-

d.

e.

f.

g.

sumption that as Christians who accept the teachings of the
Book of Concord, they are already in confessional agreement
with other Lutheran Christians such as the LCMS. Perhaps
the establishment of some kind of “preliminary fellowship
agreement” with the LCMS in that place would be appropriate, based upon the fact that no church-dividing doctrine or
practices are apparent.
Such an agreement could be reassessed periodically for the
purpose of mutual accountability and to review and foster
confessional agreement that will continue to manifest itself
in the pulpit and at the altar. Ongoing study and discussion
would be the means of fostering and furthering the unity that
already exists and determining whether and when a more
formal fellowship agreement would be possible and appropriate.
The need for more regional or local involvement of
congregations, districts, and officials in carrying out the
ecumenical responsibility of the church.
i. In the United States and Canada, Lutheran congregations are
not confined to geographical regions in isolation, but instead
overlap in any given region with congregations belonging
to other church bodies. In this situation, it is necessary that
theological discussions be coordinated by the central church
body and declarations of church fellowship take place at the
national level of the church body in order to represent all
of the congregations within the church body. It is also most
appropriate that the results of those dialogues be brought to
the national convention or assembly of that church body for
approval or disapproval of church fellowship as this decision
will affect all the congregations within the church body.
ii. When dealing with emerging church bodies in other countries, it may be feasible and helpful to have dialogues take
place at the local level as well as nationally in order to assess
whether or not we are united in the public confession of the
faith. Local dialogues could be accomplished, for example,
by regional mission directors (or other Synodical officials)
along with a theologian from the church body. They would
report the results of their dialogue and decision to enter into
altar and pulpit fellowship to the Synod for evaluation and
possible ratification.
iii. With respect to developing relationships with individuals,
congregations, groups, or entities from other church bodies, it is important to avoid either the actuality or the appearance of interference in the affairs and relationships of
those church bodies. While the Synod seeks to encourage
strong confessional theology and practice, it should do so in
ecclesially responsible ways, without encouraging internal
dissension or purposefully undermining prior relationships
with other church bodies or groups. For example, if a confessional group from within a national church invites LCMS
representatives to provide theological training or support,
it is proper to inform the national church body’s appointed
leaders of the request and seek a course of action that does
not cause offense or ill will while encouraging and supporting the cause of confessionally Lutheran theology and practice.
In connection with the previous section (4.d), we recognize
and emphasize the need to keep our partner/sister churches
informed about conversations and potential agreements and
seek their counsel, even as we ask them to do the same. In
some situations, partner/sister churches can play an important
role and help to coordinate conversations, especially when
they have a geographical, linguistic, or cultural connection and
ongoing contact with such emerging churches.
The LCMS respects the formal relationships and fellowship
agreements of its partner/sister churches, noting that they
have the right to establish such relationships with other
churches. The LCMS will take these agreements into account
as it interacts with those churches who have established formal
relationships with our partner/sister churches.
In many cases emerging church bodies strongly desire contact
with larger groupings of Lutherans beyond their borders.
Involving such churches in the theological conferences of

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 302

4/15/10 2:40 PM