# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_June 13 14 2014_S3
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

position. The Bylaws maintain the right of the Synod to interpret its own confessional article (Bylaw 1.6.2
[b]).
Doctrinal resolutions and statements, including positions adopted prior to 1977, do not alter the Synod’s
confessional position nor do they add new confessions which must be subscribed. Rather, they elaborate,
clarify, set forth in greater detail, and apply that confessional position. As has been true throughout its
history, controversy and challenge sharpen the pen for the Synod to clarify its theological position without
altering the confessional article of its constitution.
Question 1: Is the open and repeated advocacy of theological positions contrary to Synod’s stated
positions on (a) the ordination of women or women carrying out the functions of the pastoral
office; (b) theistic evolution; (c) the inerrancy and/or the inspiration of the Scriptures; (d)
church fellowship; and (e) same-sex relationships violations of Article II and Article VI 1 of
the Synod’s Constitution?
Opinion: Yes, open and repeated advocacy of theological positions contrary to the Synod’s stated
theological positions is ultimately a challenge to and a violation of the very confessional basis of Synod
expressed in Articles II and VI 1 of the Synod’s Constitution, as are all teachings and practices which
contradict Scripture and the Confessions. Doctrinal resolutions and statements, including those adopted
prior to 1977, have binding force on individual as well as congregational members of Synod. Members of
the Synod are required to honor and uphold the stated theological position of Synod, which is defined by
the confessional articles of the Constitution and any doctrinal positions adopted by the Synod to amplify,
clarify, and apply its theological position in time of question, challenge, and conflict (Bylaw 1.6.2 [a] and
[b]). Acting or teaching contrary to such is therefore a rejection of the stated confessional position of the
Synod and ultimately of Article II itself. This does not mean that doctrinal resolutions and statements,
including those adopted prior to 1977, are equal to, or that members of the Synod are required to
subscribe to them in addition to, the Scriptures and Confessions. Rather, they are adopted because they
are in harmony with Scripture and the Confessions (Bylaw 1.6.2 [b] [7]).
Question 2: Is the public rejection of “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles” (1973) a
violation of Articles II and VI 1 of Synod’s Constitution?
Opinion: Since “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles” (1973) was adopted by the
Synod (1973 Res. 3-01) “to be Scriptural and in accord with the Lutheran Confessions,” it expresses the
doctrinal position of the Synod. It derives its doctrinal authority not from the vote of the convention but
from the Word of God, which it sets forth. Public contradiction to “A Statement of Scriptural and
Confessional Principles” is, therefore, in essence a violation of Scripture and thus Articles II and VI 1 of
the Synod’s Constitution.
With the adoption of “A Statement,” the Synod required “that those who disagree with these formulations
in part or in whole be held to present their objections formally to those who have immediate supervision
of their doctrine” (1971 Res 5-24). Any dissent from the stated theological position of the Synod is to be
brought to the Commission on Theology and Church Relations in accord with Bylaw 1.8.
Question 3: Does the filing of a dissent from such theological positions of the Synod prevent action from
being commenced against such a member of the Synod, which may result in removal of such
a member of the Synod?
Opinion: While the filing of dissent does not constitute a case for removal, the member is required to
teach and practice in accord with Synod’s stated confessional position during the dissent process. If the
member fails to honor and uphold the stated confessional position of Synod during the dissent process,
CCM Minutes – June 13–14, 2014 – Page 18