# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2026_S272
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

272

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS­­—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

The left-hand, institutional dimension of the church will inevitably take different shapes in
different societies. The institutional church will almost certainly have different rights and
responsibilities under different governments and correspondingly act in different ways based
upon those rights and responsibilities. But the church will always have a left-hand component,
precisely because it lives in the world and is subject to governing authorities (cf. Romans 13; 1
Peter 2-3).
This does not mean Christian churches and/or institutions simply abdicate all left-hand matters to
the civil government. They actively participate in that left-hand realm, whether that means
advocating for specific legal or political issues, involving itself as far as possible in the legal and
political process, seeking certification for its higher education institutions, parochial schools and
teachers, among many other such activities. That may mean filing suit over matters such as
religious freedom. It may involve supporting other Christian institutions or entities in their own
legal battles against injustice. It may also involve entering into suit against those who may be
fellow Christians. As a matter of fact, the Commission believes, it frankly may be irresponsible
and unethical for the church not to do so in certain egregious cases. Imagine a scenario where a
Missouri Synod congregation knew of sexual abuse allegations against a pastor or member, yet
instead of reporting those to the authorities, sought to oversee the case itself. Likewise, imagine a
case of mental illness or domestic abuse that a congregation sought to adjudicate itself rather
than referring the parties to appropriate healthcare or psychiatric professionals. The damage
cases like this might bring upon the church legally, politically, and monetarily would be
extensive, let alone to the reputation and witness of that church in the community. That is to say
nothing of the real victims in such cases—victims who may have been protected physically and
emotionally by duly instituted laws and law enforcement to which the church may have appealed
for aid.
Sixth, and finally, the Lutheran Confessions commend authorities and institutions of the
civil realm, such as courts of law, as divine institutions which may be used profitably by the
church. Augsburg Confession 16 says:
Concerning public order and secular government it is taught that all political authority,
orderly government, laws, and good order in the world are created and instituted by God
and that Christians may without sin exercise political authority; be princes and judges;
pass sentences and administer justice according to imperial and other existing laws;
punish evildoers with the sword; wage just wars; serve as soldiers; buy and sell; take
required oaths; possess property; be married.”1
The confessions repeat the fundamental legitimacy of civil institutions again in the Apology of
the Augsburg Confession: “It is permissible for Christians to use civil ordinances, just as they
use the air, light, food, and drink. For as this universe and the fixed movements of the stars are
truly orders of God and are preserved by God, so legitimate governments are truly orders of God
and are preserved and defended by God against the devil” (Ap 8.49).2 Likewise, in its
1
Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church
(Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2000), 48.
2
Kolb-Wengert, 183.

5

2026 Convention Workbook

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44

condemnation of the errors of the Anabaptists, the Formula of Concord defends the Christian
appeal to civil government for the enforcement of secular laws. It identifies as intolerable the
opinion “that a Christian may not make use of the functions of government against the wicked in
appropriate situations, nor may the subjects of the government call upon it to use the power it
possesses and has been given by God for protection and defense” (FC Epitome 12.14).3
Elsewhere the Apology forbids “private redress,” or taking matters into one’s own hand in order
to exact revenge. Yet it accords a positive place to “public redress”: “Public redress, which is
made through the office of the judge, is not forbidden but is commanded and is a work of God
according to Paul in Romans 13. Now the different kinds of public redress include judicial
decisions, punishment, wars, and military service.” (Ap 16.7) 4 The sixteenth-century reformers
were presented with any number of legal, political, and military challenges to their view of the
gospel and their reform of churches—Luther’s excommunication and the imperial edict against
Luther’s writings and teachings in 1521, the emperor’s rejection of the Augsburg Confession in
1530, the Schmalkaldic War of the 1540s—mostly in conflict with fellow baptized Christians.
Likewise, St. Paul himself appealed to his status as a Roman citizen (Acts 16: 37-39; Acts 22:2529) as a means to protect himself against unlawful prosecution. The reformers, with Paul,
believed Christians could make use of these legitimate civil institutions, including the judges and
laws of the first-century Roman Empire or the sixteenth-century Holy Roman Empire, to protest
unjust measures, to defend life and property, and to provide free course for the proclamation of
the gospel.
Summary
In light of what has been said regarding the focus and purpose of 1 Corinthians 6, as well as its
relationship to the legal context in which we live, it is the opinion of the Commission that 1
Corinthians 6 does not categorically prohibit the Christian use of the legal system or the
Christian filing of lawsuits against fellow believers. 1 Corinthians 6 strongly opposes lawsuits
between individual believers or groups of believers that could otherwise be resolved through
mediation of the congregation or larger church. This counsel should be followed, not the least
through the church’s own processes for resolving disputes. However, Christians may avail
themselves of secular courts in cases against other Christians, ideally after all other
congregational and ecclesiastical options have been exhausted. This is all the more pertinent and
applicable for institutions and agencies of the church, which are left-hand expressions of the
church and are subject to left-hand laws and regulations (fiscal, political, legal, etc). Ultimately,
the Commission does not categorically endorse or encourage Christian participation in lawsuits
against other Christians, nor does it wish to ignore the clear warnings of St. Paul in 1 Corinthians
6. However, we do acknowledge that, like many instruments of the civil, left-hand realm that are
capitulations to sin—war, divorce, the criminal justice system, civil government itself—the use
of the courts by Christians and against Christians is a sad reality, yet a reality nonetheless that
must be used at times, with all due self-examination and restraint.
Adopted by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations
February 28, 2025
3
4

Kolb-Wengert, 521.
Kolb-Wengert, 232.

6