# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2016_S257
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

VII. FAQS ON TASK FORCE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Q4.

A.

Q5.

A.

(Church and Office, or Church and Ministry). This does not
mean, however, that ordination is incidental or unimportant
to the Office of the Holy Ministry. The Apology notes: “If
ordination is understood with reference to the ministry of
the Word, we have no objection to calling ordination a sacrament” (XIII 11). Walther also vigorously objects to ordination’s omission because it has “the important purpose of
publicly confirming that the call is recognized by the whole
church as legitimate and divine” (Pastorale). This important,
theological aspect of ordination is emphasized in the report,
noting that ordination is the means by which the “transparochial” (beyond the local) aspect of the ministry is affirmed.
The report’s recommendations, therefore, while certainly
respectful of tradition, are based on theology, not mere custom.
Do the report and recommendations satisfy concerns that
have been raised about practice that is consistent with
Augsburg Confession (AC), Article XIV?
Both seminary faculties and the CTCR have examined our
report. In conversations as well as by resolution, all three
entities expressed support of the theological framework put
forward in the report and its particular discussion of AC XIV.
Objections that have been raised elsewhere had to do only
with the concern that the understanding of AC XIV in the
report might lead to false conclusions about ordination, e.g.,
as that an emphasis on ordination is a disavowal of the truth
that the Office of the Keys is given to the whole Church (see
Walther, Church and Office, Thesis IV on the Church and
Thesis VI on the Office). Such a misperception is contrary to
the understanding of the task force and its report.
Why does the task force report ignore the biblical office
of deacon since it is mentioned in 1 Tim. 3:8–13 (see also
Phil. 1:1)?
Rather than ignore what the Bible says about deacons, the
task force gave full consideration to the matter, including the
idea of a biblical office of deacon. But there is no clearly
defined “office of deacon.” The references to deacons in
the New Testament simply do not provide any sort of specific definition or description of such an office. The New
Testament term diakonos means servant or minister—in a
basic sense as a go-between—and is used both in ordinary
contexts and church contexts (e.g., the “attendants” in Matt.
22:13 are deacons, as are the “servants” in John 2:2). In the
words of John Collins, perhaps the foremost authority on
deacon terminology, in both verb and noun forms “usage
was fluid and applications were varied” (John N. Collins,
Diakonia: Re-interpreting the Ancient Sources, p. 235).
As a consequence, in church history and in contemporary
Christianity, the title “deacon” can be and has been applied
to church offices with a wide variety of responsibilities, from
pastors of lesser rank to assistants providing bodily aid and
liturgical helpers. The task force, therefore, noted on page 6
(fn. 21):
It is certainly the case that the Bible refers to deacons;
however, there is no indication within the texts regarding the service that deacons provide. They are associated
with bishops (“overseers” or ἐπίσκοποι), respectable and
reputable, and clear about the faith, but beyond that there
is nothing about what the “office” implies or involves.
For that reason it is not surprising that deacons are not
a constant in church history and that their role varies
dramatically in different times and places. John Collins

Q6.

A.

Q7.

A.

Q8.

A.

257

simply says “it is unlikely that this section of 1 Timothy
can provide any more precise idea of the diaconate” (Diakonia: Re-interpreting the Ancient Sources [New York:
Oxford University Press, 1990], 238). None of this denies
that the church is free to have or not have an office of
deacon, but the definition of that office would be a matter
of human authority, not divine authority, and it should
not create confusion about the necessity of the one office
of preaching.
Why not ordain deacons as a helping office to pastors
rather than turn to specific ministry pastor (SMP) ordination?
Establishing an ordained diaconate is a theoretical option
that the LCMS could pursue, and the task force considered
this. It would require, however, numerous theological clarifications. “Deacon” is not clearly defined biblically, confessionally, or historically, and in churches that have deacons,
the office and its responsibilities have a variety of meanings.
Questions about the status and meaning of the office would
need to be determined by the Synod in a way that satisfied
all concerns. How would it be distinguished from the pastoral office? Since the Synod currently has female deacons
(that is, deaconesses), how would male and female deacons
differ? After examining this idea, it was the judgment of the
task force that ordaining deacons would entail further confusion and would not heal divisions.
Don’t we need a variety of church workers, just as there
are a variety of medical professionals who have different
duties?
Yes, we do. We have a variety of auxiliary offices that are
optional for congregational service, in addition to the one
required Office of the Public Ministry. Some see an analogy
between the relationship of doctors and physician assistants
or nurse practitioners with that of pastors and deacons, since
doctors delegate some of their work to such assistants whom
they oversee and pastors delegate responsibilities to the deacons they oversee. For example, both doctors and physician
assistants or nurse practitioners can prescribe medications.
A better analogy might be that of a judge and other officers
of the court. A judge is assisted by many other officials, but
only he sits over courtroom proceedings, an authority that
cannot be delegated. For the Office of Public Ministry, the
defining responsibility is one of public preaching and the
administration of the Sacraments for the church (see AC V).
Based on this, the report’s first recommendation is to make
this clear: when you preach and administer the Sacraments
for a congregation, you are serving as a pastor. Note that, as
with any analogy, correlations to another situation are limited. In each case, one must ask what responsibilities can
rightly be delegated and what responsibilities are so central
they cannot be delegated.
How do we uphold the Office of Public Ministry in a positive manner without it diminishing the priesthood of all believers? How do we uphold the priesthood of all believers
without diminishing the office?
Both the priesthood of believers and the office of preaching—the public ministry—are biblical teachings. They must
be held in balance, without distortion by elevating one at the
expense of the other. The report seeks to be very clear in this
regard. Ecclesiastical authority, or “the Office of the Keys,”
is given to the whole Church, but the whole Church confers the authority and duty to publicly preach and administer
2016 Convention Workbook