# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2013_S345
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
It remains a basic principle for the Synod that the unity in the church which we seek is not an
external unification imposed from without by the adoption of common polities and by
organizational affiliation or by united endeavors in worthy causes, but the unity in the church
which results from confessional unanimity, that is, genuine concord or agreement in doctrine. In
relation to other church bodies and agencies the Synod will gladly cooperate in externals, that is,
participate in projects which do not involve joint worship or the spiritual ministry of the church.
In line with this principle the Synod will continually examine the propriety of present affiliations
and will carefully weigh proposals to enter new alliances.12
The reference in LSTE to "cooperation in externals" here is significant. The concept appears in an earlier
CTCR report, Theology of Fellowship, which states:
Our Synod should clearly recognize that, in the case of necessary work on the local, national, or
international level, where the faith and confession of the church are not compromised, and where
it appears essential that the churches of various denominations should cooperate or at least not
work at cross purposes, our churches ought to cooperate willingly to the extent that the Word of
God and conscience will allow.13
This has implications for dialogue opportunities where theological conversation with another Christian
church will most likely not result in altar-pulpit fellowship because of substantial, continuing theological
differences. Such discussions should not be viewed as failures if they enable a clearer understanding of
our convictions and our differences, as well as those teachings we hold in common. The discovery of
common ground with other Christians may well provide the opportunity to explore possible areas of
cooperative work in such matters as relief efforts in times of disaster and joint responses to particular
moral or ethical questions.
The LCMS has been able, in past years, to engage in joint efforts with the ELCA and its predecessor
church bodies because, despite differences, there were also shared convictions that enabled the LCMS
and various LCMS entities to engage in that work without doctrinal compromise. More recently, the
level of disagreement between our church bodies has grown, not diminished, with the result that more
and more joint work is threatened. One outcome is that, as unlikely as it may seem, there are increasing
numbers of situations in which the position and practice of the LCMS on certain significant issues has
more in common with some non-Lutheran groups than it has with the ELCA.14
Presently, the Synod has two specific opportunities to engage in theological dialogue with non-Lutheran
churches. The LCMS recently began a series of theological conversations/dialogues with the Anglican
Church in North America (ACNA) and has recently discussed the possibility of some formal doctrinal
discussions on specific questions of doctrine and practice with representatives of the Roman Catholic
Church (RCC). In both cases—one actual and one hypothetical—the dialogues would not involve an
expectation of entering into altar and pulpit fellowship. Prior to any formal discussions with the ACNA
12

LSTE, p. 14.
CTCR (1965), p. 28.
LCMS 2010 Res. 3-03 required the LCMS Praesidium to report to the Synod on the current state of cooperative work with
the ELCA. A link to the Praesidium’s report may be found at www.lcms.org/ctcr, together with a link to the CTCR’s
“Principles for ‘Cooperation in Externals’ with Theological Integrity.” The latter document provides the theological basis for
the Praesidium’s memo to the Synod.
13
14

5

345

and in the dialogue itself, LCMS representatives consistently tried to avoid any inaccurate public
perception of the purpose and meaning of the dialogue or any misunderstanding on the part of the
church bodies with whom we have the opportunity to engage in discussions. For example, we
emphasized to ACNA representatives that we would not consider altar-pulpit fellowship as a potential
fruit of the dialogues at the present time because of the different understandings of our churches
regarding the Lord’s Supper and apostolic succession as well as other issues. Nonetheless, we expressed
an interest because of the perception—shared by both churches—that we do share important common
concerns such as the importance of upholding scriptural authority and the traditional Christian
understanding of human sexuality and marriage. It is hoped that the dialogue will result in one or more
statements of common conviction, for example, regarding ecclesial or societal issues such as biblical
understandings regarding the ordination of those engaging in homosexual acts and the doctrine of
marriage.
The invitation to engage in direct theological discussions with the RCC presents a similar case. There
are significant differences between Lutherans and Roman Catholics in numerous doctrinal issues,
including such primary matters as authority in the church and the doctrine of justification. The LCMS
could not join in mutual declarations between the ELCA (or predecessor bodies) and RCC
representatives, most notably in the case of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.15
Today, with the ELCA having made significant changes in its position on matters of sexual morality and
qualifications for ordination, RCC representatives have shared with LCMS leaders their desire for
discussions with our church on societal issues as well as on the specific question of the ordination of
women to the pastoral ministry/priesthood. They have expressed appreciation for the willingness of the
LCMS to continue to emphasize certain biblical and traditional Christian teachings. It is important to
recognize that—given challenges to traditional Christian teaching in matters of sexual ethics as well as
changing ecclesial practices—now may be a particularly opportune moment for discussions with the
RCC. Once again, the goal would not be altar and pulpit fellowship (much less structural union of any
sort), but the possibility of statements of Christian truth that may be affirmed by Christians from
different theological traditions.
The level of societal, cultural, and ecclesial upheaval on moral issues and changes of long-standing
church practices at the present time compel us to consider the importance of a united Christian voice on
specific issues, wherever that is possible without compromise in other areas of doctrine and life. Where
Christians from varying traditions share a common truth, the strength of their voice is clearer and
stronger if they speak together. This invites us to consider theological discussions that would allow us to
study and address various issues with other Christians, including those with whom we have marked and
substantial theological disagreements in other areas. It is also very possible that such discussions will
facilitate joint efforts together with other Christians to uphold biblical standards of morality, to respond
to crises and catastrophes, and to participate in certain legal actions and activities.
At no point, however, should dialogue with other Christians be allowed to deny or to gloss over areas of
theological disagreement. Authentic ecumenical dialogue must always be in the service of the truth of
God’s Word, centered in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Church has no higher treasure.
Adopted by the CTCR
September 17, 2011
15

See Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification in Confessional Lutheran Perspective, www.lcms.org/ctcr.

6

2013 Convention Workbook