# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2007_S406
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

406 THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

distinctive pastoral functions, then (says Res. 3-0O8A) women may
not serve in such offices—because this is what Scripture clearly
teaches about the implications of the order of creation for such ser-
vice. Underlying the Synod’s position is not only an affirmation of
the order of creation, but a deliberate effort to say no more and no
less than what Scripture alone says regarding the implications of the
order of creation for the service of women in the church.

“The order of creation” and ‘‘what the Bible says,” therefore, are
not two different (even “complementary”) norms or standards of
authority for determining the church’s doctrinal stance regarding
the service of women in the church. There is only one “rule and
norm” for the doctrinal position of the Synod on this (and every
other issue): Scripture alone. If the dissenters believe that Scripture
clearly and definitively teaches that, due to the order of creation,
women are forbidden to serve in certain humanly instituted offices
in the church (even when these offices do not require them to carry
out the distinctive functions of the pastoral office), then it is in-
cumbent upon those dissenting to demonstrate where and how
Scripture makes this clear. This, in the CTCR’s judgment, the dis-
senters have not done.

At the same time—and this needs to be emphasized in view of
certain mischaracterizations of the Synod’s position in the expres-
sions of dissent—it is not accurate to say that 2004 Res. 3-08A as-
serts or implies that the order of creation has no relevance at all for
the service of women in humanly instituted offices in the church.
As noted above, Res. 3-08A strongly affirms and repeatedly cites
the CTCR’s April 2004 opinion on the service of women in con-
gregational offices, particularly its concluding discussions regard-
ing “Edifying Decisions in Matters of Adiaphora” and the
importance of “Supporting the God-Given Family Structure” in
both society and the church.’ “Congregational polity,” says the
Commission, “is an adaphoron, neither commanded nor forbidden
in Holy Scripture’(28). Questions of polity, such as whether a
woman may serve as chairperson of a given committee (or whether
a congregation should even have that committee) are strictly speak-
ing adiaphora—tmatters that are explicitly neither commanded nor
forbidden by Scripture. The Scriptures expect Christians to make
use of their “sanctified common sense” in applying Scriptural teach-
ing to their different contexts in matters of adiaphora. Such appli-
cation needs to happen, and in fact does happen, in countless ways
as individual Christians and congregations seek to make godly de-
cisions about their daily lives. But there is an important distinction
between applications explicitly made by Scripture and applications
that are left to our own ministerial use of reason.

The Commission also points out, however, that “to say that
polity is an adiaphoron is only the beginning of the discussion”(28).
“In matters of adiaphora—things neither commanded nor forbid-
den by Scripture—the church’s arrangement should support and re-
inforce the Scriptural teaching” (28).

In particular, says the CTCR, “the congregation’s polity should
uphold the God-given family structure,” which is rooted in the or-
der of creation.

There is great significance in the creation of Adam and Eve recorded in

Genesis 2 and in other scriptural texts dealing with creation (e.g., 1 Cor.

11;:8-12). The Creator expressed His intent and design for all future

“Adam and Eves” precisely by the way in which He created the first

Adam and Eve. Unlike the animals, Eve. was created to be a helper fit

for and corresponding to Adam. Therefore the wife is not inferior to her

husband but co-equal. The two become one flesh. Moreover, God cre-
ated Adam first and then Eve, and He created Eve from Adam and for

Adam. Therefore the Creator revealed His design for the marriage rela-

tionship. The husband serves as the head and the wife submits herself

to her husband. (29)

“Large segments of our culture dismiss and even ridicule notions
such as these,” says the CTCR. “Especially in our cultural context,”
therefore, ‘‘a congregation should be concerned about what its polity
says and in what way its polity supports the church’s teaching”(29).

2007 Convention Workbook

The CTCR’s conclusion also serves as a helpful way of sum-
marizing the Commission’s response to the primary concerns un-
derlying these expressions of dissent:

There is no “Thus saith the Lord” regarding positions such as executive di-

rector/president and assistant director/vice president. These are offices es-

tablished by the church in Christian freedom. Scripture does not prohibit
women who possess the requisite gifts from holding these humanly-estab-
lished offices, assuming that the occupants of these offices do not “perform
those functions that are distinctive to the public exercise of the ministry of
Word and sacraments” (The Service of Women in Congregational and Syn-
odical Offices, Part B. 3), or carry out “official functions [that] would in-
volve public accountability for the function of the pastoral office” (Women
in the Church: Scriptural Principles and Ecclesial Practice, 46). In filling
these offices the congregation should take into account, among other things,
the aforementioned family structure. Further, the Commission encourages
men not to neglect their leadership responsibilities in their congregations.

Since the church encourages husbands to exercise their God-given headship

in a God-pleasing way at home, the church should correspondingly en-

courage men to exercise leadership in their congregation. Congregations are
encouraged to organize themselves in ways that complement and reinforce
the family, for the church is “the household of God” (1 Tim. 3:15)....The

Commission further recommends that congregations encourage all their

members (male and female, single or married) to exercise their God-given

responsibilities of service and leadership in their congregations. (30)

It should be noted, finally, that the CTCR continues to work to-
ward completion of the assignment given to it by the 1995 synodi-
cal convention to carry out “a comprehensive study of the scriptural
relationship of man and woman” (Res. 3-10). Two consultations in-
volving both men and women outside the Commission who are
competent in theology are being held by the CTCR in connection
with the completion of this assignment (Dec. 4-5, 2006 and April
16-17, 2007). Many of the theological issues raised by those dis-
senting from 2004 Res. 3-08A will undoubtedly be discussed in the
CTCR’s continuing work on this assignment.

To summarize: The CTCR agrees with the dissenters that the or-
der of creation is clearly taught in Scripture and has important impli-
cations for the service of women in the church—specifically with
reference to the pastoral office and its distinctive functions. Contrary
to the claim of some of the dissenters, the order of creation argument
has not been ignored by the Synod or by the CTCR. In fact, all of the
recent CTCR documents on women’s service in the church (1985,

.1994, 2005) take into account what Scripture teaches about the order

of creation in their argumentation. The CTCR also believes, however,
that we are bound to Scripture alone as the norm when it comes to
making doctrinal judgments about the specific implications and ap-
plications of the order of creation for the service of women in the
church. It believes that the dissenters have failed to provide scriptural
evidence to show that, in the words of one dissenter, “a woman is Vi-
olating the order of creation by serving in certain capacities where she
does not carry out functions of the pastoral office.”

4, Laymen Performing Functions of the Pastoral Office (1989
Res. 3-05B; 2004 Res. 5-09)

Background

At its 1989 convention, the Synod adopted Res. 3-05B “To
Adopt Recommendations of Lay Worker Study Committee Report
as Amended.” These “Recommendations” included “Guidelines for
Congregations Regarding the Performance of Pastoral Functions
[preaching, leading public worship, public administration of the
sacraments and of the office of the keys] When No Ordained Pas-
tor Is Available.” The “Guidelines” are introduced with the fol-
lowing paragraph:

Lutherans believe, teach, and confess that God has instituted the office

of the public ministry (AC V) and that “nobody should publicly teach

or preach or administer the sacraments in the church without a regular
call” to serve in this office (AC XIV). Therefore, only those who hold
the office of the public ministry should exercise distinctive functions of
this office. However, when no pastor is available, and in the absence