# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1998_S197 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 197 ment of belief, commend Dr. Walter Lang for his many years of defending creation and opposing evolution, and ask Concordia Publishing House to publish Brian Young’s book Doubts about Creation—Not After This! and encourage all LCMS schools to use It. Trinity, New Haven, MO; Washington Circuit, Missouri District; Trinity, Denver, CO 3-147 To Delete Article and Bylaw on Dissent WHEREAS, Since “‘the purpose [of voting in matters of doctrine} is not to decide the correctness of a doctrine by majority vote or even by unanimous vote” and “The orthodox Christian Church re- mains aware of the fact that it cannot by resolution make or give birth to Christian doctrines” (Pieper, III, p. 430), it therefore begs the question for Synod or Districts in convention to assume the af- firmative votes reflect scriptural teaching and the negative votes non-scriptural teaching; and WHEREAS, Walther’s words in his 1848 synodical address, “Clearly, according to the constitution we have no right to draw up decrees. to issue laws and ordinances, and to pass judgment on any matter that imposes something on the congregation or to which the congregation must unconditionally submit,” and “There may al- ways be congregations who use their freedom to reject our propos- als, even when these proposals are beneficial to them” (CTM, vol. XLIII, 7, p. 431) make sense only if Walther is assuming that Synod and Districts pass resolutions concerning matters not com- manded or forbidden by God; and WHEREAS, Synod’s current Bylaws, on the one hand, provide a quatenus subscription to doctrinal resolutions (“Such resolutions . .. are to be honored and upheld until such time as the Synod amends or repeals them” [1.09 b, 7])}—a subscription which Pieper says is “at bottom, in conflict with common honesty and upright- ness” (I, p. 356)—and on the other hand those same Bylaws de- mand that these doctrinal resolutions be honored and upheld pub- licly—something that puts them in fact on the same level as those confessional items contained in Art. I] of Synod’s Constitution, though they are nowhere mentioned in Art. II; therefore be it Resolved, That Art. 1.09 and Art. 2.39 of Synod’s Bylaws be deleted and that no doctrinal resolutions be voted upon at District and synodical conventions. Mt. Zion Minneapolis, MN 3-148 To Respond to Dissent from “Synod’s Position” Wuereas, The 1995 convention resolved (3-05) “That mem- bers of the Synod who are convinced that woman’s suffrage does not lie in the area of Christian freedom but is contrary to the Word of God, be urged to make use of the established procedures for ex- pressing dissent” (Bylaw 2.39); and WHEREAS, The Synod at the same time resolved “that honest Christian conscience can and does exist on both sides of this issue, but such difference of opinion is not divisive of Christian fellow- ship”; and WuereEas, A number of members of the Synod have submitted to the CTCR a statement of dissent to the Synod’s current position permitting woman suffrage, including references to exegetical stud- ies not available when the Synod changed its position on this mat- ter in 1969; and WHEREAS, The Commission on Constitutional Matters ruled on Oct. 23, 1996, based on Bylaws 1.09 b and 2.39 b and c, that in the eventuality that “neither the dissenter or the Synod has changed,” “The dissenter may decline to practice woman suffrage, but may not persist in teaching that it is contrary to the Scriptures”; and WHEREAS, Bylaw 2.39 c states in part, “If such resolutions are of a doctrinal nature, dissent is to be ... brought to the attention of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations before finding expression as an overture to the convention calling for revision or recision”; and Wuereas, The Synod is not allowed to change its doctrinal po- sition unless it is convinced from the Scriptures, the Lutheran Con- fessions, and/or logical deductions from these norms; and WuerEaS, The CCM opinion would prevent dissenters from bringing to the Synod’s attention their reasons to request a change in the Synod’s position, therefore making such a change almost im- possible; and WHEREAS, There are no statements in the Bylaws instructing the CTCR when, how, or even if it should respond to formal statements of dissent to synodical resolutions; therefore be it Resolved, That the CTCR be instructed to make at least a pre- liminary theological response to each formal statement of dissent it receives within one year of receipt, using assistance from the sem- inaries, if necessary, and publish any formal statements of dissent which it receives, along with any response it makes in the next Convention Workbook, so that the Synod can have the opportunity to evaluate its position and, if necessary, make changes; and be it further Resolved, That the Oct. 23, 1996 CCM opinion that dissenters “may not persist in teaching that [woman suffrage] is contrary to the Scriptures” be considered null and void until their statement of dissent has been heard by the Synod, and the Synod in convention has an opportunity to respond to their dissent and to any response the CTCR may make; and be it finally Resolved, That in light of the long-standing difference of opin- ion concerning woman suffrage, all members of Synod be urged to listen to people with whom they disagree and be ready to speak the truth in love at all times. Quincy Circuit Forum Central Illinois District 3-149 To Remove Assignment on Study of Inerrancy of Scripture WHEREAS, The Synod at its 1973 convention requested that the CTCR “conduct an intensive study of the doctrine of inerrancy and also of the traditional interpretation of Genesis 1-3 and the inter- pretation of the Book of Jonah” (1973 Proceedings, 46); and WHEREAS, The Commission on Theology and Church Relations, in view of more pressing assignments, has asked that this assign- ment be removed from its agenda; therefore be it Resolved, That the Synod grant the CTCR’s request to remove the study on inerrancy called for by the 1973 convention from its agenda. Commission on Theology and Church Relations 3-150 To Request Faculty and Board of Directors of Valparaiso to Confess and Practice Doctrinal Positions of Lutheran Confessions WHEREAS, Valparaiso University was established as a Lutheran university with ties to The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod; and WuereEas, Valparaiso University recruits students and funds from LCMS congregations; and