# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2019_S243
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

II. THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
the negative impact of the conscription of women on
individual consciences, marriages, families, and society
as a whole, the LCMS in convention strongly oppose any
legal action that forces the compulsory service of women
in the military, also called the conscription of women, by
mandatory participation in Selective Service registration,
a draft, or by any other mechanism” (2016 Res. 5-11A).

interpretation, and the absence of specific and explicit
biblical mandates regarding the service of women in
the military — it is also possible to understand how
Christians, including members of the LCMS, can in
good conscience support and defend “the informed
consciences of women who have carefully considered
their station in life and Holy Scripture on this issue who
wish to voluntarily serve in our nation’s military” (2016
Res. 5-11A), even when this may include serving in
positions of combat.

In Part III of this report, the CTCR offers practical
resources and guidance to Christian women (especially
LCMS women) who, depending on their specific
circumstances and possible changes in U.S. law regarding
conscription, may find it necessary to object formally
and conscientiously to participation in combatant
and/or noncombatant military training and service.
Guidance to pastors and others who seek to support
the actions and decisions of conscience-bound women
in these circumstances is also offered in this final part
of the report.

The discussion above raises a rather obvious and yet
critical question: How can Christians who are equally
committed to the authority of God’s Word affirm the
proper use of human reason and natural law in supporting the teachings of God’s Word and, sincerely seeking
to be guided by this inspired and infallible Word, arrive
at different conscience-bound conclusions about the
issues discussed in this document? In order to address
this question, we must also consider what Scripture itself
teaches about the critical role played by conscience in
seeking to discern God’s will for the lives and behavior of
His people on the basis of His Word.

We must add, however, that for other reasons
discussed above — for example, the distinction between
the two kingdoms, the inherent complexities of biblical

S

Scripture’s Teaching about Conscience

cripture asserts that all people have
the law “written on their hearts” (Rom. 2:14–15).
The conscience, therefore, serves as a guide
to distinguishing right and wrong. Conscience is
not an infallible guide for sinful people living in a
fallen world,68 but it is by no means to be dismissed,
taken lightly or ignored. In the New Testament,
the term “conscience” signifies “more than strong
feeling and emotional reaction to an issue or a task,”
but rather “moral response in depth on the basis
of conclusions reached by evaluating the ethical
aspects and implications of a given issue or situation
(cf. Acts 23:1; Rom. 2:15; 1 Cor. 8:7, 10, etc.).”69 Scripture
strongly warns against acting in a way that is contrary
to one’s conscience, calling it sin (Rom. 14:23). Paul urges

•Rom. 14:2–3, 13–23: Paul here addresses the

matter of conscience in the context of a very
real-life issue for Christians of his day: eating

certain foods in relation to Old Testament dietary

restrictions. Everyone is free in this respect (v. 2).

Yet, they should not judge the other with respect

to adiaphora (those things which God has neither

commanded nor forbidden) but which God has left

in the realm of Christian love (v. 3, 13). We have full

Christian liberty in all matters of adiaphora, and

this should never be discounted. Yet, in each case,

we look to what will provide the greatest benefit
for
our neighbor, seeking to build up each other
(v. 19–20). Everything that is not from faith is sin;

what is not done in faith is not done to the glory

of God (v. 23).70

68
Our conscience has been obscured as a consequence of original sin,
which makes it harder for us now to discern what is sinful (1 Cor. 2:14;
Eph. 4:18). Therefore, the conscience must be informed and guided by
God’s Word (Deut. 8:3; Ps. 119:105; 2 Tim. 3:16–17). For the CTCR’s critique of a recent view of and appeal to “conscience” that is not rooted in
and governed by the authority of God’s Word, see the April 2012 CTCR
report on the 2009 social statement of the ELCA: Response to “Human
Sexuality: Gift and Trust,” lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=1820.

See R.C.H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the
Romans (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 831–854,
and Martin H. Franzmann, Concordia Commentary: Romans (St. Louis:
70

CTCR, Guidelines for Crucial Issues in Christian Citizenship (1968),
7–8, lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=366.
69

WOMEN AND MILITARY SERVICE: A LUTHERAN PERSPECTIVE

|

PART 2

14

• 1 Cor. 8:1–13: Here Paul speaks about the issue of
food offered to idols, particularly eating at a feast
for an idol. Some defile their conscience by acting
against it. Paul speaks of their conscience “being
weak.” A weak conscience is one that is not fully
clear as to whether an act is right or wrong. That
person is then more easily influenced by the behavior of others, which could cause him or her to act
against his or her conscience.71 Paul has a twofold
concern: that the weak should not judge the strong,
and the strong should not despise the weak. Any
decision regarding adiaphora involves showing love
for another person for whom Christ died and must
consider whether the choice will build up or cause
spiritual injury (v. 9–12).

According to Scripture, it is never right (or, as Martin
Luther famously observed, safe) to go against one’s
conscience. “When a Christian is persuaded that he
faces a choice in conscience, he must be certain in his
own mind that his conscience is informed by principles
which conform to God’s will. For he has the burden of
not violating his own conscience.”75 A weak conscience is
one that is not fully certain as to whether an act is right
or wrong. It is therefore continually uncertain, in doubt
and easily swayed. Whenever dealing with matters of
adiaphora, one should strive to do no spiritual harm to
another for whom Christ died. All things are lawful, but
not all things are beneficial. And whatever one does in
matters of adiaphora is to be done by faith in Christ and
to the glory of God.

• 1 Cor. 10:23–33: Here again, Paul addresses the
issue of conscience in the context of the eating of
meat sacrificed to idols, particularly eating meat
sold at the market or served privately at a pagan’s
home. All things are lawful, but not all things are
beneficial or build up. In cases of adiaphora, one is
to consider the interest and well-being of others (v.
23). We are not to slander those who think or act
differently in such matters (v. 20). Whatever we do,
we do it to the glory of God (v. 31).72

This brief review of Scripture’s teaching regarding
conscience affirms that, according to Scripture itself, it is
indeed possible for Christians who are equally committed to the authority of God’s Word and who seek sincerely to be guided by it to come to different conclusions
about God’s will for their lives and actions in certain
situations where there is no explicit or absolute “thus
says the Lord.” This was true not only in St. Paul’s day
(with regard to questions like eating meat that had been
sacrificed to idols), but it is also true in the church today
with regard to a whole host of complex questions that
fall into the realm of adiaphora. To cite just one example
within the churchly life of the LCMS, in 1995 the Synod
in convention adopted Res. 3-05 to address ongoing
discussion and debate in the Synod concerning woman
suffrage in the voters assemblies of LCMS congregations.
In this resolution, the Synod formally and officially
“declare[d] that honest Christian conscience can and
does exist on both sides of this issue, but such difference
of opinion is not divisive of Christian fellowship” — fully
recognizing that those on both sides of this issue based
their conscience-bound convictions on the inspired and
infallible Scriptures.

• 2 Cor. 6:3: For the sake of the Gospel, pastors are
to avoid any “obstacles” that would cause others
to stumble. This includes not turning matters of
adiaphora into divine mandates that would create
unnecessary conscience-related barriers to the proclamation of the Gospel.73

us to have a good conscience (1 Tim. 1:5) and asserts that
by acting against their conscience “some have made
shipwreck of their faith” (1 Tim. 1:19). Consider these
specific texts:

• 1 Tim. 1:5, 19: A good conscience comes only
through a sincere faith (Eph. 2:8–9) and a clean heart
(Ps. 51:10) that clings to the Gospel of Jesus Christ
and the promises of God in Baptism (1 Peter 3:21)
and not by following false teaching, myths and
endless genealogies.74

In a similar way, the Synod rightly acknowledges in
2016 Res. 5-11A that Christians (including those within
the LCMS) can, have and do come to differing conscience-bound positions on the issue of women serving
in combat. This is particularly the case for those who are
most impacted by this issue, both actually and/or potentially: Christian women.

Concordia Publishing House, 1968), 245–258.
71
“Preserving a good conscience is part of a Christian’s high responsibility. Paul testified before the Sanhedrin and the Roman authorities
that he had always maintained a good conscience before God and
other people (Acts 23:1; 23:16) … Not only should each Christian strive
to live before God and his neighbor with a good conscience, but he
should also try to keep others in the congregation from the burden of
a strained conscience. This is part of what it means to live as sanctified
people.” Lockwood, 285. Also, consider Lenski, The Interpretation of St.
Paul’s First and Second Epistles to the Corinthians, 337.
72
See Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s First and Second Epistles to
the Corinthians, 418–428, and Lockwood, 249–355.
73

Lenski, ibid., 1062–1063.

74

R.C.H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colos-

WOMEN AND MILITARY SERVICE: A LUTHERAN PERSPECTIVE

A Christian woman (married or not) may come to
the conscience-bound conviction that what Scripture
(together with reason and natural law) says about the
order of creation, while completely valid and true, is
not decisive on the issue of women in combat. Reasons
for arriving at this conclusion might include the fact
that scriptural discussions of this issue are primarily
concerned with the role of women in marriage and the
family and with order in church, and that Scripture does
not make explicit every implication or application of
the order of creation for life in the civil estate (including
service in the military).

sians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 502–504, 531–532.
75

CTCR, Guidelines for Crucial Issues in Christian Citizenship, 8.

PART 2

|

15

Women and Military Service: A LUTHERAN PERSPECTIVE

Part 3:

On the other hand, a woman (whether or not she is
a wife or mother) could also come to the consciencebound conviction that God does not want her to serve in
the military based on the ample scriptural evidence we
have surveyed here regarding male-female distinctions
rooted in the order of creation, as well considerations
supported by reason and natural law. A woman who is
a wife and/or a mother also has a primary, God-given
vocation that could further bind her conscience against
her service in the military. This is especially true if her
husband does not approve of such service or if such
service would put her life (or the life of her unborn
child or children) at risk, thus directly harming or
threatening her primary God-given vocation as wife
and/or mother. In this connection, it should be noted
and emphasized that The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod has consistently held (and continues to hold) on
the basis of Scripture that “the living but unborn are
persons in the sight of God from the time of conception
(Job 10:9–11; Ps. 51:5; 139:13–17; Jer. 1:5; Luke 1:41–44).”76
This conviction alone could well bind the conscience of
a woman (especially a wife or potential mother) against
being employed in combat or being conscripted into
military service of any kind, since service in combat or
in the military could potentially threaten not only her
own life but also the life of her unborn child, before she
or “the powers that be” are even aware of the existence
of this child whom Scripture teaches (and she believes)
is a “person in the sight of God from the moment of
conception.”

Practical Considerations
Supporting Our Christian Sisters and Brothers in Matters of Conscience

I

f the law is changed so that women in the
United States are required to register for the draft, it
is important to remember that the U.S. government,
through both the Selective Service System and the Department of Defense, provides for conscientious objection, which should77 include women whose consciences
are bound with respect to women serving in combat or
being conscripted to serve in the military in any capacity.

or deny a conscientious objector classification based on
the evidence a registrant has presented. If a favorable
decision is not granted, it may be appealed to a Selective
Service District Appeals Board, and this decision may be
appealed to the National Appeals Board.
Two types of service, determined by the individual’s
specific beliefs, are available to conscientious objectors
in the event that the draft is again implemented. The
person who is opposed to any form of military service
may be assigned to alternative service (conservation
corps, caring for the very young or very old, education or
health care). The person whose beliefs allow for service
in the military but in a noncombatant capacity will serve
in a branch of the armed forces but will not be assigned
training or duties that include using weapons. The length
of such service will normally be 24 months.

The Selective Service System provides guidance for
those who desire to register for conscientious objector
status.78 All conscientious objectors are still required to
register with the Selective Service System. Conscientious
objection is identified in the Department of Defense Instruction on “Conscientious Objectors” (DoDI 1300.06)
as: “Opposition to participating in any form of war or
the bearing of arms due to sincerely held morals, ethical
or religious beliefs, or a combination of such beliefs.”79 A
registrant making a claim for conscientious objection is
required to appear before a local board to explain his (or
her) beliefs. This may include providing written documentation or appearances by people who can attest to
the claim. The local board will decide whether to grant

In the event that a person volunteers or is conscripted
and inducted into a branch of the armed forces, he or she
may also apply for conscientious objector status following the instructions referenced above in DoDI 1300.06.80
There are two classifications:
Class 1-O Conscientious Objector: A member who,
by reason of conscientious objection, sincerely opposes
participation in combatant and noncombatant military
training and service in war in any form and for whom
such beliefs play a significant role in his or her life.

The word “should” is used since to this point it is hypothetical and
has yet to be tested.
77

76
1979 Res. 3-02A. This position has been re-affirmed by the Synod in
numerous official resolutions and statements throughout the years. For
a strong and compelling argument against the conscription of women
rooted primarily in convictions regarding the sanctity of human life
from the moment of conception, see Andrew A. Sicree, “A Miscall
to Arms: Why Selective Service for Women is Immoral,” Touchstone
(September/October 2017), 55–58.

WOMEN AND MILITARY SERVICE: A LUTHERAN PERSPECTIVE

243

78

https://www.sss.gov/consobj

79
fas.org/irp/doddir/dod/i1300_06.pdf. It should be noted that DoDI
1300.06 on “Conscientious Objectors” was revised July 12, 2017 (the
previous version was dated Aug. 21, 2006). The revisions were modest,
but the precise wording is important, especially when it comes to such
an important issue of conscience for many.

|

PART 2

16

WOMEN AND MILITARY SERVICE: A LUTHERAN PERSPECTIVE

80

|

See footnote 79.
PART 3

17

2019 Convention Workbook