# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_2001_S89 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) CONVENTION ESSAYS AND REACTIONS fulness to the doctrine that God has given us in the Scriptures. Moreover, we should realize that when we are faithful in our practice of fellowship and do not have joint worship services with the pastors and congregations of other church bodies, we have an opportunity to instruct people regarding doctrinal differences in Christendom that threaten the Gospel and to offer a witness to others about those matters in which they teach falsely. Of course, it is extremely important that such instruction and witness not proceed from a spirit of arrogance but out of sincere concern for the spiritual well-being of people. But unfortunately, it is very hard, practically impossible, to avoid being labeled “arrogant” or “mean” or “unloving” in an age that has no use for the uncomfortable truths of religion. Attitude is everything today and truth is nothing. But as members of a church still committed to the Scriptures, we need to maintain the truth of the Scriptures and to support one another in that task, if we still believe, really and truly believe, that God has communicated doctrinal truth in His Word—and that that communication matters. If we do, then we will not want to confuse people by inviting into our pulpits representatives of churches that do not teach correctly. In fact, out of concern for the church—which the Holy Spirit brings into being by the Word—we need to avoid all sorts of projects that involve proclaiming the Gospel when there is no agreement in the gospel, i.e., “in doctrine and in all its articles,” as the Lutheran Confessions describe it (FC Ep. X.5). As a Synod, we are committed to working together to establish Christian schools, to publish religious materials (hymnals, Bible studies, and the like), and to carry out mission work of all sorts. These are essential to the task of the church to “preach the Word,” and so we do them together in doctrinal unity. But when we engage in these sorts of activities with other churches, even at a local level, and there is no agreement in doctrine, we make it possible, indeed likely, for error to intrude into the proclamation of God’s Word. This we cannot permit, for God saves people through the truth and not through false doctrine. Besides the pure preaching of the Word, as Lutherans we have also committed ourselves to the right administration of the sacraments (AC VII)—a commitment that is the basis for our practice of close (or closed) Communion. In recent years, close Communion has become an issue for some in our Synod; so it is necessary for us to explore the connection between our Communion practices and our commitment to God’s truth. As many of you probably know, our Synod has a long history of dealing with this issue, for even in the early days of the Synod’s history, there were many in America, including many American Lutherans outside the Missouri Synod, for whom close Communion represented the “epitome of an intolerant and unevangelical Christianity.”9 For them, Communion was the application of God’s forgiveness in Christ to the individual sinner and nothing more. There are still many people who think this is the case today; and therefore, the practice of close Communion makes no sense to them. Once again, it appears arrogant and loveless. But in point of fact, the Lord’s Supper is something more than 89 application of the Gospel; it is also an outward sign of an inward fellowship. Let me explain. Clearly, the Lord’s Supper is a means of grace, a principal vehicle by which God conveys to sinners the body and blood of Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins. This is its basic and chief purpose; but that does not mean that this is its only purpose. It has a secondary purpose, a result of the first purpose really, and that is to demonstrate the bond of fellowship that exists between those who commune together. In other words, going to Communion signifies both the relationship of God to the individual communicant and the relationship of the communicants to each other. This is different from preaching the Word. The direction of preaching is entirely one way—a message from God to sinners about their sin and especially their salvation in Christ; and since we are all sinners, we make no distinctions among those who can hear the preaching in our churches. All are welcome, whatever church they belong to and even if they belong to no church at all. But what does the Holy Spirit accomplish by that Word? He works faith in the heart by the Word, and in so doing, He establishes new relationships—not only between God and the sinner but also between the believers themselves. They are one with each other as well as with God in Christ. We are brothers and sisters in the Lord. Like the Word, the Lord’s Supper nurtures and sustains both of these relationships—between God and man and between each other. But unlike the Word, it also reveals the relationships. Hearing the Word is passive and invisible— we cannot see the Word enter the ear and convert the heart; but we can see people kneeling together to partake of the Lord’s body and blood. The Lord’s Supper is visible and external as well as invisible and internal. It marks us as belonging to God and to each other; it marks us as belonging to the church. St. Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 10:17, “Because there is one loaf, we, who are many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.” Thus, when we Christians eat together the bread that is the body of Christ, we all become one body—and not just symbolically—but mystically, spiritually, really—the body of Christ. All of us are one in Christ and through Communion are bound more tightly together than are body and soul in one person. One God dwells in us; one Spirit rules in us; one Lord Jesus Christ is our Life.10 Of course, the question immediately arises that if the Lord’s Supper is a bond between believers, that is, Christians, and not just Lutherans, how is it that we refuse to commune any except those in our fellowship? The answer lies in our earlier discussion regarding the importance of true doctrine as the basis for our Gospel proclamation, since to commune those who do not belong to our church is to confirm them in the errors of the churches to which they do belong, errors that threaten the very oneness that we have in Christ. Now, of course, as soon as we say something like this, we immediately run afoul of contemporary attitudes again regarding truth and error in religion and whether, in particular, it is possible to identify one church as correct in its doctrine and another wrong. So let’s be honest with one an200l Convention Proceedings