# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2001_S404 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 404 ADDITIONAL THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS AND REPORTS—OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT The Formula of Agreement in Confessional Lutheran Perspective An evaluation of the Formula of Agreement by the Department of Systematic Theology Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne With a summary and study guide prepared by The Commission on Theology and Church Relations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod A Summary and Study of the Seminary Evaluation 1. The 1997 assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) adopted by an 82 percent majority A Formula of Agreement (FOA), which was signed by the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Reformed Church in America, and the United Church of Christ. This document says that the signatories “recognize each other as churches in which the gospel is rightly preached and the sacraments rightly administered according to the Word of God.” Perhaps the most significant point of difference that FOA declares to be settled is the doctrine of the Lord’s Supper. 2. Regarding this and other historic points of Lutheran-Re- formed difference, FOA says: “in light of the radically changed world of the twentieth century, it was deemed inappropriate to de- fend or correct positions and choices taken in the sixteenth century, making them determinative for Lutheran-Reformed witness today.” In essence, this says that the historic confessions are no longer binding. Such an assertion is perhaps compatible with an open- ended Reformed understanding of confessional subscription or with the ELCA constitution which identifies even the Augsburg Con- fession as simply a “true witness” to the Gospel. It is not compati- ble with the binding nature of confessional subscription in historic Lutheran tradition. The present evaluation of FOA is informed by all of the Lutheran Confessions found in the Book of Concord. 3. Signatories to FOA “recognize each other as churches in which the gospel is rightly preached and the sacraments rightly ad- ministered.” By adopting FOA, the ELCA extends this recognition to pastors and congregations who deny or avoid saying that the true body and blood of Christ are present in or under the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper. But the Lutheran Confessions teach precisely this, and they reject the contrary Reformed position (Small Cate- chism; Augsburg Confession X; Formula of Concord VII). Lutheran and Reformed doctrine and practice concerning the Lord’s Supper truly are contradictory, not “complementary” as FOA claims. In FOA’s new frame of reference, opposing views are valued as equally acceptable versions of the truth. 4. The adoption of FOA by the ELCA has implications for both pastors and laypeople in that church body. Pastors will act contrary to the Lutheran Confessions, to which they pledged themselves in their ordination vows. Laypeople will participate in communion services led by Reformed ministers in Lutheran or Reformed churches where questions may arise about whether what is distrib- uted is actually the body and blood of Christ. In effect, subscrip- tion to the Augsburg Confession by ELCA congregations and pas- tors has been supplanted by FOA’s requirement of a practice that is contrary to the Lutheran Confessions. 5. FOA holds that while neither Lutherans nor Reformed pro- fess to explain how Christ is present in the Lord’s Supper, both af- firm that Christ Himself is present and received in the Supper. This is only partly correct. While it is true that no one knows “how” Christ’s body and blood are present, nonetheless the Lutheran Con- fessions identify “where” the presence is and “what” is present. In the sacramental] union (unio sacramentalis), bread and wine are the body and blood of the Lord. (As Jesus said, “This is My body.”) 2001 Convention Workbook These are received and eaten and drunk specifically by the mouth (manducatio oralis), and not merely by faith. Also unbelievers eat and drink the true body and blood of Christ with the mouth (mand- ucatio indignorum). Christ is received in the Sacrament precisely because He is present with His body and blood in, with, and under the elements of bread and wine. Simply saying that Christ is the host at the table or that Christ is fully present — without specifi- cally mentioning His body and blood as He did in instituting the Lord’s Supper — is not to confess the biblical doctrine of the Sacrament. 6. Identifying what is eaten and drunk in the Lord’s Supper was the historical point of contention between Lutherans and Reformed. It is simply not true that the two agreed about the fact of the “Real Presence,” but differed only as to the mode of that presence. The Reformed claimed that Christ could not be present in the Sacra- ment according to His human nature. They said that a human body can only be in one place at a time, and that Christ’s body is at the right hand of God, understood as a specific place in heaven. 7. FOA raises other issues of concern besides the Lord’s Sup- per. Since the Reformed do not practice emergency baptism, for example, Lutheran parents with a child in danger of death should not expect a Reformed pastor serving their congregation to be overly concerned. Likewise, since FOA speaks of justification as “including forgiveness of sins and renewal of life,” it is possible for it to say, “there are no substantive matters concerning justifica- tion that divide us.” But FOA fails to define justification properly or precisely in Scriptural and confessional terms. 8. In short, FOA simply glides over historic differences that have separated Lutheran and Reformed churches. What was once considered false doctrine by one party or the other 1s now under- stood as “mutual misunderstanding and misrepresentation” and “complementary rather than contradictory.” By agreeing to FOA, the ELCA has effectively denied its own confessional basis by ap- proving positions rejected in the Lutheran Confessions. Study Questions (Paragraph numbers refer to paragraphs in the summary above.) Paragraph 1 What is the basic affirmation made by FOA? Paragraph 2 How does FOA’s understanding of the role of confessions differ from that expressed in the Book of Concord itself? See the Preface to the Book of Concord (Tappert ed., pp. 12-14) and the Preface to the Formula of Concord (Tappert ed., pp. 504-506). Paragraph 3 Are Lutheran and Reformed positions on the Lord’s Supper contradictory or complementary? Why? Paragraph 4 What challenges does the adoption of FOA by the ELCA pre- sent for the pastors and laypeople of that church body? Paragraphs 5-6 What are the three hallmarks of Lutheran teaching about the na- ture of the Lord’s Supper (whether or not you use the Latin catch- phrases to refer to them)? Identify the basis for each in 1 Cor. 10:16-17 and 1 Cor. 11:23-29. Why can we say that the body of Christ born of Mary is present in the Lord’s Supper? See 1 Cor. 10:16-17 and 1 Cor. 11:23-26. How is it possible that this body is present in the Lord’s Supper? See Matt. 28:18, 20; Eph. 1:20-23; 4:7-10; 1 Cor. 15:27; Heb. 2:8.