LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1981, Page 152

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

152 THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

temporary Christendom or which are of relevance for the
attainment of a Lutheran consensus in the United States of
America.” Attention continues to be given to hermeneutics and
ecclesiology. A consultation on biomedical ethics involving
representatives from the seminaries of LCUSA member bodies
was held in January 1980, and at the present time plans are
being made to continue this study by focusing attention on in
vitro fertilization. Projected for the future is a major study on
“born again theology.”

The division has also cosponsored dialogs during 1979—81
between Lutherans and Baptists, Conservative-Evangelicals,
Episcopalians, Methodists, and it has arranged for a number
of conversations with the Jewish community. A new round of
dialogs with Reformed theologians is scheduled to begin in the
fall of 1981.

With respect to the Svnod's association with the ALC, LCA.
and AELC in LCUSA, see the recommendations below, at the
end of this section on inter-Lutheran relationships.

4. Other Lutheran Churches

a. Confessional Lutheran Church of Finland

The commission has been informed that Dr. Preus has
been in correspondence with Rev. Markku Sarela, president of
the Confessional Lutheran Church of Finland, relative to
reestablishing of altar and pulpit fellowship between the
LCMS and the Confessional Lutheran Church of Finland. The
CLF was formerly in altar and pulpit fellowship with the
LCMS. but in 1970 severed this relationship.

b. Evangelical Lutheran Synod

In recent years representatives of the Svnod have met
informally with representatives of the Evangelical Lutheran
Synod for the purpose of seeking closer ties between our two
church bodies. Representatives of the ELS attended the 1979
convention of the LCMS as observers and Dr. Samuel Nafzger
and Rev. Jerald Joersz attended the 62nd (1979) and 63rd (1980)
annual conventions of the ELS. The commission again urges
the Synod through its President to seek further contacts with
the Evangelical Lutheran Synod witha view towards restoring
fellowship between the ELS and the LCMS.

c. Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod

Although no meetings have been held between representa-
tives of the WELS and the LCMS since May 1978, observers
from the WELS attended the 1979 LCMS convention and Dr.
Karl Barth, chairman of the CTCR, and Dr. Samuel Nafzger,
executive secretary, attended the 45th biennial convention of
the WELS in Watertown, Wis., in August 1979. No further
meetings have been planned at the time of this report. The
commission wishes to encourage the President of the Synod to
work towards further contacts with the Wisconsin Evangelical
Synod in order to discuss the issues of doctrine and practice
separating our synods.

d. Evangelical Lutheran Federation

President Preus reported at the September 1979 meeting of
the CTCR that he had received a letter from Rev. Ervin
Dobberstein, president of the Evangelical Lutheran Federa-
tion (see 1979 CW’ p. 77, for further information), requesting
information on the official position of the LCMS ‘‘on the
subject of possible fellowship with the Evangelical Lutheran
Federation.” In response to Dr. Preus’ request for counsel on
this matter, the commission pointed to its 1979 report to the
Synod, which suggested that another meeting be held between
representatives of the LCMS and the ELF “‘to resolve questions
about several sections of the ELF constitution and bylaws.” At
the time of this report no second meeting with the ELF has
been scheduled.

Dr. Preus has informed the commission that the ELF has
adopted a resolution at its third annual convention in October
1980 requesting altar and pulpit fellowship with the LCMS.
The commission urges the Synod to facilitate further discus-
sions with the ELF in the hope that closer ties may be
established between our churches.

e. Lutheran Church in America

Following the 1977 convention of the Synod, President

Preus, in response to Res. 3-20 encouraging him “to initiate
and or continue discussions with all Lutheran bodies regard-
ing fellowship,” invited the LCA to engage in fellowship
discussions. The LCA respectfully declined this invitation,
indicating that it regards further discussion with the LCMS
unnecessary, since the LCA has held traditionally that it is
already in fellowship with ‘any church body subscribing to the
Unaltered Augsburg Confession and Luther’s Small Cate-
chism.” Upon the recommendation of the CTCR, President
Preus reiterated the LCMS’ invitation on the basis of the
recommendation of the “FODT Report” (cf. 1979 CW, pp. 84—
87) that “inter-Lutheran study and discussion of Scripture, of
the Confessions, and of theological issues crucial to the faith
and life of the church today be encouraged among members of
our churches.” The LCA responded by stating it did not agree
“that it would be wise to have bilateral discussions at this
time.”

The 1979 synodical convention directed the President, in
consultation with the CTCR, “to invite the Lutheran Church in
America to reconsider its decision not to hold discussions with
the LCMS on the issues that separate our church bodies.” Ina
letter dated Oct. 23, 1979, President Preus carried out this
request. At a Nov. 30—Dec. 1, 1979 meeting, the Executive
Council of the LCA, while noting with appreciation the LCMS’
1979 desire to hold bilateral discussions, once again respect-
fully declined this invitation. The LCA council reiterated the
LCA position on fellowship, adding that the LCA’s “‘present
discussions with the American Lutheran Church and the
Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches make conver-
sations with other Lutheran bodies inadvisable at this time.”

f. Association of Evangelical Lutheran Churches

The commission has been informed that despite the invita-
tion of the LCMS representatives to continue to meet with
representatives of the AELC, no meetings were held since the
last convention of the Synod. The LCMS representatives had
proposed that the FODT Report (see 1979 CW, pp. 84—87 for the
summary of this report published by the LCUSA) be discussed,
but the AELC representatives respectfully declined.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Preamble: A Statement on Inter-Lutheran
Relationships

Allinterchurch activities proceed from the assumption that
all Christians in all church bodies share a common faith and
spiritual fellowship in the Lord Jesus Christ. With this spiritual
unity as the basis. Christians in faithfulness to their Lord and
His Word, and for the sake of His church and the mission He
gave it, endeavor to be of one mind and heart in their
confession and practice of the Biblical doctrine of the Gospel,
in all its articles.

When such agreement between church bodies becomes
evident, they officially declare themselves to be in altar and
pulpit fellowship with each other. Because the pastors,
teachers, congregations, and official agencies of such church
bodies enjoy the closest possible relationship in the confession
of the Biblical Gospel, they will frequently engage in many
forms of joint worship and work on behalf of the Gospel.

Churches in fellowship, particularly when they exist in
different lands and cultures, may decide to carry out many of
their activities together as “partner churches.” Such a partner-
ship relationship has proved to be an effective witness to the
universal nature of the church as well as a mutually beneficial
and supportive way to carry out our Lord’s Great Commission.

When church bodies lack the doctrinal agreement necessary
for altar and pulpit fellowship, they may choose to participate
in a council of churches that will assist them in seeking
doctrinal consensus as they work together to meet important
human needs. Although such a relationship does not require
the same degree of consensus necessary for altar and pulpit
fellowship, it is nevertheless an important recognition that the
members of the participating church bodies share a common
confessional heritage and are committed to work together in a
mutual effort to achieve and express agreement in doctrine.

Participating in such a council may be inexpedient for some
church bodies not in fellowship with each other. In such cases.
bilateral discussions and other means are used to seek the