# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2013_S369
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS
society treat these neighbors, who have no protection under the law (e.g., constantly face the possibility of being deported, have no authorization to work)
and yet hold no self-identity except that of being an “American”? A number
of Christian (and non-Christian) citizens and residents have often exercised a
measure of patience towards these children, waiting for some remedy from
the civil government.65
It is important to note that Christians who, in faithfulness to their consciences, practice such temporary forms of peaceful disobedience or resistance
are not thereby “for” illegal immigration, but rather “against” some aspects
of current law that they believe do not yet deal justly with their immigrant
neighbors. Moreover, whether one entirely agrees with the current state of
immigration law or not, responsible Christians on both sides of the debate
must also recognize that they have to live with and take full responsibility
for the impact for the decisions they make and the actions they take have on
the lives of actual people. This includes especially, but not exclusively, consequences for immigrants and their families (e.g., a deportation may, in some
cases, divide a family or put someone’s life at risk).
The Lutheran distinction between the two realms reminds us that disagreements about immigration law among Christians should not infringe
upon their unity in Christ, which the means of grace alone bring about and
preserve. We can then once again freely acknowledge that, among Lutherans
who sincerely want to show mercy to their immigrant neighbors and also
obey the civil authority, there can be a reasonable spectrum of opinions and a
variety of debate positions concerning what is—and what is not—just, good,
reasonable, orderly, and peace building for society in current immigration
law.66 Christians should exercise civility when dealing with one another in
matters that pertain to the state of the civil law lest their speech becomes a
cause for division and strife within the church.
There is room for Christians who disagree with one another to speak
freely to each other in love and with respect on difficult and complex civil
issues without fear of losing their right standing before God through faith in
Jesus Christ, which the Gospel alone establishes apart from our works and
choices. A Christian who acts in good conscience according to his God-given
vocation in the temporal realm has acted in accordance with the law of God
and, moreover, can still be saved in the spiritual realm where one’s standing
65
At the time of publication a temporary remedy is available. On August 15, 2012, the U.S.
Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began to accept requests for “Consideration of
Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals Process,” which allows certain children who came to
the United States before the age of 16 to apply for deferral of deportation or removal. As a
rationale for deferred action the USCIS mentions its desire “to focus its enforcement resources
on the removal of individual who pose a danger to national security or a risk to public safety”
and not “on low priority cases, such as individuals who came to the United States as children
and meet other requirements.” Online: http://search.uscis.gov/search?affiliate=82601b2ec&q
uery=deferred+action+process.
66

Sánchez, “Immigrants Among Us,” 58.

before God does not depend on the fulfillment of the law.67 Christians should
therefore exercise their vocations with joy and responsibility in the left-hand
realm, without fearing the loss of their salvation in Christ, which is a gift of
the Gospel alone. We may disagree vehemently on left-hand issues, and even
criticize our own brothers and sisters who hold positions in government for
their actions, but we should be careful about condemning Christians because
they have exercised their vocation, which they seek to do for the sake of the
neighbor.
It is also true that Christians must not seek to use their freedom in the
Gospel to irresponsibly opine or hold some absolute position on this or that
law merely for the sake of this freedom. Instead, Christians should use their
freedom to serve others, for the good of their neighbors. Christians must recognize that views about various laws may have consequences for real people,
their neighbors. Christians, therefore, ought not make decisions on civil laws
that affect others without carefully and responsibly assessing what their positions will mean for concrete neighbors.
The two realms must be distinguished and not confused, but there is also
a relationship between the two. While the state should not restrict the church’s
proclamation of the Gospel and pastoral care to all people regardless of their
legal status, the government does have some role in regulating the work of
the church as an institution in the left-hand realm. For instance, as mentioned
before, under the civil law the church cannot employ and pay wages to an
undocumented church worker. In a similar manner, while the church does not
legislate or tell the civil government exactly how to legislate, it can be argued
that Christians as church, either individually or corporately, may have some
role in pointing out sin and injustice to the civil authorities as part of their duty
to teach the law (i.e., what is pleasing to God according to His revealed will)
when the government does not act in a just or godly manner.68 But how and
when is the church meant to fulfill this duty?
The LCMS has officially pointed out sin in the case of abortion, which constitutes a clear case where a moral practice protected by civil law is contrary to
God’s law (more specifically the fifth commandment). Not just as individuals
but as a church body (and thus corporately) the Synod has pointed out that

67
The confessors teach that a Christian who exercises an office under the civil government
does a “God-pleasing” task and can do so “with a good, clear conscience.” FC, SD XII, 17-18.
See also Martin Luther, “Whether Soldiers, Too, Can Be Saved,” AE 46:87-137.
68
“Even when agreeing, for instance, that the church does not have a Gospel-based responsibility to promote the transformation of the civil realm, Lutheran theologians and church bodies
have disagreed about whether the corporate church (and not just the individual Christian) has
a Law-based duty to teach the state ethical principles. Theologians and church bodies have
also disagreed about the most prudent and effective means by which the church might actually teach those ethical principles in a pluralistic and democratic society.” CTCR, Render unto
Caesar…and unto God: A Lutheran View of Church and State (1994), 53.

33

abortion is sin and has made its position an official one.69 But how and when
is that to be done in the case of immigration law? Could or should it be done
publicly as Synod in the case of certain immigration laws? Or does the LCMS,
perhaps more humbly, lay out the issues, the tools for Lutheran interpretation
and analysis, and the broader concerns and limits to be taken into account in
responsible Christian decision-making?
The latter approach lets individual Christians make their own conscientious decisions, with some guidance from the church as Synod, concerning
what is just and reasonable when there is no clear consensus among all Christians on the moral failure of certain aspects of immigration law. The LCMS has
traditionally gone in this more private and individual direction with societal
and political issues where black-and-white is not easily determined in every
case. This approach seeks to teach not by direct, irrefutable command but
through biblical and theological guidelines and principles that the Christian
is meant to reflect on and contextualize.70 It also allows room for Christians,
especially as individual citizens and residents of the state, to disagree with and
persuade one another on left-hand kingdom issues through the use of reason.
Moreover, it calls all sides to repentance when their positions are colored
by selfish aims or mean-spirited rhetoric, and avoids making an individual
Christian feel that his or her standing before God is conditional upon general
or specific agreement about immigration law.

369

34

IV. Who Is My Neighbor?
The Place of the Christian’s Vocation in the Immigration Debate
What does it mean to fulfill the law of God? Christians know the law of
God as the Ten Commandments. But how is the Decalogue fulfilled or carried
out in their everyday lives? This question remains an abstract one until we
look more closely at the concrete vocations God has given us and the specific
neighbor or sets of neighbors God has put in our lives.71 Vocation is the calling God gives each Christian to fulfill His law by serving some neighbor(s)
through the exercise of certain tasks and responsibilities. When a Christian
serves his neighbor in the context of his God-given vocation or “station in
life,” he fulfills concretely God’s “commandment of love” and thus His will
that we love our neighbor as ourselves.72 Since Christians relate to many
neighbors, they typically have more than one vocation and, therefore, more
than one neighbor to attend to in this life.
To have a vocation is no accident, but God’s created intent for us. Vocations can be appropriately understood as part of the fabric or order of God’s
own creation. Vocations derive in one way or another from God’s command
and institution of work as part of His creation. Even before the Fall into sin,
God created man to tend the garden (Gn. 2:15). Even though after the Fall
work is often seen and felt as a divine curse (cf. Gn. 3:17-19), Christians should
not forget that work is actually a temporal means instituted by the Creator
through which He blesses, provides for, protects, and sustains His creation.73
“Work is the ‘mask’ behind which the hidden God Himself does everything
and gives men what they need to live.”74 God has provided the world with

71
This section develops an argument made in Leopoldo A. Sánchez M., “Arizona Neighbor On My Mind,” ConcordiaTheology.Org (May 3, 2010). Online: http://concordiatheology.
org/2010/05/arizona-neighbor-on-my-mind. See Appendix II for an explanation of the term
“vocation” as used in this report.

69

The most recent LCMS resolution reiterating this (and using the language of “sin”) is Res.
6-02A, “To Reiterate Synod’s Stance on Abortion” (2001). See “Abortion,” in This We Believe, 1.
70
CTCR, Render unto Caesar…and unto God, 51-52. To illustrate the “more traditional Lutheran
view,” the document cites a 1983 “catechism” on proposed tuition tax credit legislation: “In
still other cases, sensitive questions may arise for public debate concerning which God’s Word
provides even less specific guidance…In these cases it may be helpful for the Synod, while
recognizing that Lutheran Christians equally committed to following God’s will as revealed
in Holy Scripture may come to different conclusions, to keep its members informed and offer
guidance to them as they determine their own positions” (p. 51).

72
“This commandment of love, valid everywhere and for all people, becomes specific for us as
individuals in the context of the station in life in which God has placed us. Through our station
in life we are placed into a definite and particular relationship to one another. And our duty to
serve one another thereby takes on very specific form.” Paul Althaus, The Ethics of Martin Luther
(Minneapolis: Fortress, 1972), 36.
73
“The world only sees the troublesome and heavy burden of work and therefore flees and
hates it. To do that, however, means to look at work with the ‘eyes of the flesh,’ which can
only see the toil and trouble of work—and the flesh ought not to have anything else. However,
Christians see work with the eyes of the Holy Spirit…God has sweetened the sourness of work
with the honey of his good pleasure and the promise of his blessing…Thus work is indeed
under a curse, but it also stands under God’s blessing.” Ibid., 102.
74
Ibid., 101; “Instead of coming in uncovered majesty when he gives a gift to man, God places
a mask before his face. He clothes himself in the form of an ordinary man who performs his
work on earth. Human beings are to work, ‘everyone according to his vocation and office’;
through this they serve as masks of God, behind which he can conceal himself when he would
scatter his gifts.” Gustaf Wingren, Luther on Vocation (Evansville, Indiana: Ballast Press, 1994),
138 (cf. 123-143).

35

37

2013 Convention Workbook