# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1975_S467 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) REPORT ON DISSENT F. Criticlam of Part Vt tt is said that Part VI of “A Statement.” unlike Walther and the fathers, holds that our confessional subscription binds us in every instance to the contessiona! interpretation and use of each and every passage of Holy Scripture to which reference is made in the symbolicel writings. Properly understood, “A Statement” says precisely what Or. Arthur Carl Piepkorn said in the January. 1958, issue of the Concordia Theological Monthly. “In the public teaching of a Lutheran clergyman or instructor, he must interpret the Sacred Scriptures according to the Symbols and not vice versa. This does not mean that he is in any way prevented from considering every possible legitimate interpretation that can be placed upon any given passage or group of passages of the Sacred Scriptures. If in the process. however, he were to come to a definitive conclusion incompatible with the teaching of the Symbols, he would be bound in conscience and in moral honesty to withdraw from the church which imposes such an obligation upon him.” (Arthur Carl Piepkorn, “Suggested Principles for a Hermeneutics of the Lutheran Symbols," CTM. 1958, p. 4) Or. Piepkorn continues: “We are not bound to the exegesis which the Symbols give of any particular passage which they choose to interpret. Thus we need not believe that Psalm 119:1 refers to the Law in its strict sense (FC Ep Vi 2) or that the scope of Gen. 17:4-8, 19-20 includes infant Baptism (FC Ep XII 8), This does not mean. however, that we are free to reject a doc- trinal conclusion which the Symbols draw from their interpretation (even erroneously) of one or more passages. or that we may justify rejection of a doctrinal conclusion by a disavowal one by one of the passages that the Symbols cite in its support.” (/bid pp. 20-21) Or. C. F. W. Walther's position relative to the binding nature of con- fessional exegesis is given in the following quotation from his essay “Why Should Our Pastors, Teachers, and Professors Subscribe Unconditionally to the Symbolical Writings of Our Church?”: However, since the Symbols are confessions of faith or doctrine, the Church necessarily cannot require a subscription to those matters which do not belong to doctrine... The same is true of the interpreta- tion of certain Bible passages. The only criterion of an incontrovertible “prophecy,” or interpretation of Scripture, which St. Paul demanded is “Whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith.” Rom. 12:6. If, for instance. an exegete does not reach the specific sense of a Bible passage and yet interprets it in such a manner that his interpretation rests on other clear Bible passages. he is indeed mis- taken in supposing that a certain teaching is contained in this specific Bible passage. but he is not erring in doctrine. In like manner he who unconditionally subscribes to the Symbolical Books declares that the interpretations which are contained in the Symbols are “according to the analogy of faith.” (C. F. W. Walther, “Why Should Our Pastors, Teachers and Professors Subscribe Unconditionally to the Symbolical writings of Our Church.” CTM. 1947, p. 242) 22 Conclusion The very fact that some of the formulations in "A Statement’ have been subject to grave misinterpretation indicates that it participates in the limita- tions of every Human attempt to express the content of Christian doctrine. Because even the language of the Augsburg Confession was subject to mis- understanding. Melanchthon remarked: “Nothing can be said so carefully that it can avoid misrepresentation’ (Ap VII and Vill, 2: cf. XI, 84). In the in- terest ot clarification at certain points in ‘A Statement.” the Commission on Theology and Church Relations makes the following recommendations: 1, That future reprints of “A Statement” add to Article | a footnote explaining the ferm “anonymous Christians.” to wit: people in pagan cultures who through the influence in their lives of the universal lordship of Christ have given themselves to seifiess service of others even though they have not yet learned from the preaching of the Gospel the name of Him under whom they live and by whose grace they have been transformed 2. That Article Il, while rightly ascribing an instructional function to the law. express more explicitly the accusing function of the law so that it is clearly stated that the law always instructs in such a way that it at the same time shows the need for constant repentance in the life ot Christians. 3. That Article Ill contain an additional antithesis rejecting any view of the church's mission that fails to recognize the witness value of deeds of love which flow from faith. 4. That Article IV contain a statement on prophecy that recognizes and expresses the broader connotations of the term “prophecy” in the Old Testament Since "A Statement’ does not presume to be a flawless articulation of the doctrinal issues it treats. it can be freely acknowledged that continued testing of the adequacy of its formulations is not only necessary but will serve to strengthen its witness to the truth which it confesses. This having been said. however, it must also be said that an examination of the major criticisms of the theological formulations and content of ‘A Statement” has shown no cause why the Commission on Theology and Church Relations should alter its opinion of November 21. 1972: We find the doctrinal content of ''A Statement’ to be in accord with the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions and to contain nothing contrary to them. We aiso find the doctrinal content of “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles" to be in accord with the doctrinal position of The Lutheran Church— Missouri Synod as it has been taught historically and expressed in the ofticial doctrinal statements of the Synod 23 -—— ABBREVIATIONS AC Augsburg Confession Ap Apology of the Augsburg Confession Ep Epitome of the Formuta of Concord FC Formula of Concord Lc Large Catechism SA Smaicaid Articles Sc Small Catechism $D Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord All citations trom the Lutheran Contessions are taken from the Book of Concord edited byT G Tappert (Phitadelpnia Fortress Press 1969) uniess otherwise noted 467