# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1998_S158 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 158 THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS Christians who hold a scriptural view of the nature and benefits of the Sacrament and for whom there are no scriptural grounds to deny the Sacrament; and WHEREAS, This convention interpretation further increases ten- sion within our Synod by serving as a basis for supervisory and brotherly evaluation and admonition not always supported by Scripture and the Confessions; and WHEREAS, Synod’s present practice of close Communion is de- fined primarily in terms of denominational affiliation (an applica- tion regarding which Scripture does not clearly inform us) rather than a definition identifying the need for a common scriptural un- derstanding of the nature and benefits of the Sacrament (repentance of sin, belief in Jesus as Savior, trust in his words “given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins,” belief that Christ’s body and blood are truly present in the sacrament, understanding and con- fession of the Christian faith, and ability to examine oneself): and WHEREAS, Synod’s pastors, who have been trained and certified by our Synod to be responsible servants of the Word and described as being “stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Cor. 4:1) are in the best position to apply the Gospel (including the Sacrament of the Altar) in the most appropriate way for the eternal welfare of souls that come under their care; therefore be it Resolved, That the entire second “Resolved” of 1986 Res. 3-08 and quoted in 1995 Res. 3-08 be rescinded; and be it further Resolved, That it be considered appropriate for congregations and pastors of the Synod to commune baptized Christians holding a common scriptural understanding of the nature and benefits of the Lord’s Supper as described in the sixth “Whereas” above, including the doctrine of the real presence; and be it finally Resolved, That for the sake of faithfulness to Scripture and the spiritual welfare of those communing, the pastors and congrega- tions of the Synod be urged to follow a Communion practice which avoids the extremes of being too “closed” or not “closed” enough. Good Shepherd Edgewood. NM 3-14 To Commune Those Who Accept Real Presence WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod has opposed efforts to unite Christians at the Lord’s Table through doctrinal compromise; and WHEREAS, The Prussian Union of 1817, which allowed Luther- ans and Calvinists to celebrate Holy Communion together, was re- garded as “unionism” by our Missouri Synod forebears, and dis- couraged the Synod from pursuing fellowship with other Christians; and Wuereas, Much of the doctrinal compromise of the past has now given way to seeking doctrinal agreement through bilateral di- alogues by a number of denominations, together with the full par- ticipation of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod; and WHEREAS, The following quotations from dialogues indicate an emerging consensus on the presence of Christ in the Sacrament of Holy Communion: “We affirm that in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper Jesus Christ, true God and true man, is present wholly and entirely, in his body and blood, under the signs of bread and wine” (Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue); “The Sacrament is a means of grace. The assurance of his presence is given in the self-witness of Christ in the instituting rite: This is my body, this is my blood. The worthy participant is the one who receives in faith and repentance the Christ who of- fers himself in the sacrament. The total Christ. the divine-human person is present in the sacrament, but it does not explain how he is present’”’(Lutheran-Reformed dialogue). “We confess and affirm that the ‘once-for-all-time’ offering of Christ, his body and blood, which has overcome the reign of sin and death is present, distributed to and received by all who participate in the Eucharist meal. Faith trusts the promise that ; sin is forgiven” (Lutheran-Episcopal dialogue): and WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod has devel- oped guidelines for administering Holy Communion by military and institutional chaplains which also apply to campus pastors, al- lowing people to receive the Sacrament who “hold the essence of the Christian faith, including the doctrines of the real presence and the Lord's Supper as a means of grace’; therefore be it Resolved, That we give praise to God the Holy Spirit for the amount of agreement on the sacramental presence of Christ which has been realized: and be it further Resolved, That, on the basis of this emerging doctrinal agree- ment and the precedent set by military, institutional, and campus clergy—as well as our Lord’s invitation and command to “do this’—we welcome to the Lord’s Table those who “hold the essence of the Christian faith, including the doctrine of the real presence and of the Lord's Supper as a means of grace.” Resurrection Coronado, CA 3-15 To Express Concern and Encourage Appropriate Response to Those Associated with “A Declaration of Eucharistic Understanding and Practice” WHEREAS, Our Synod has on many occasions reaffirmed the practice of close(d) Communion as biblical and loving and has en- couraged all our congregations to practice close(d) Communion; and Wuereas. A group within the LCMS states that they believe there should be no “denominational requirement on baptized Chris- tians” who desire to receive the body and blood of Christ in the Lord’s Supper (point 6 of “A Declaration of Eucharistic Under- standing and Practice”); and WuerEaS, Denomination affiliation does represent acceptance of that denomination’s belief; and WHEREAS, The policy of communing “baptized Christians” who consent to the basic idea of the Christological presence in the Sacrament and are repentant, but who do not belong to a denomi- nation in altar and pulpit fellowship with the LCMS is not in ac- cord with our Synod’s understanding of close(d) Communion which teaches that those of a different confession of faith be de- nied the Sacrament because “the Lord’s Supper is a testimony to the unity of faith” (Explanation of Small Catechism, question 305 C) — except for extreme cases of pastoral necessity which are by their very nature rare: and WHEREAS, The Praesidium of the LCMS in a public statement made about this group stated, “We regret the fact that some mem- bers of our synodical family have persisted in the advocacy of an erroneous position in regard to close(d) Communion. Sadly, they have done this in spite of the fraternal, pastoral, and faithful admo- nition of our Synod’s President, and of our Synod’s District Presi- dents”; and WuerEAS, Such public statements which openly contradict the stated doctrine and practice of the LCMS are destructive to the unity of the church, cause further schism, and lead the weak and undiscerning into error; therefore be it Resolved, That the Synod in convention express concern and sorrow that such a public display of schismatic doctrine and prac- tice should be encouraged by any group within the LCMS, and be it further Resolved, That the Synod in convention enjoin those in posi- tions of ecclesiastical supervision to take the necessary steps ac- cording to synodical procedure for calling those erring members of this group to repentance and if necessary (that is, if repentance for this public sin is refused) take the corresponding following steps to remove them from synodical membership; and be it finally