LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2010, Page 14

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

14

SYNOD REPORTS

Lutheran Council because of their awareness of the ILC’s theological integrity, with which the LCMS is in full agreement.
• The LCMS is in a position to provide theological leadership, thus
filling the vacuum in our country and world.
o Lutheran churches and leaders around the world are seeking
closer relationships with the LCMS.
o Lutheran people in the United States are confused about what
it means to be Lutheran.
o This identity crisis provides special opportunity for Gospel witness in a way that honors Christ and His church, speaking the
truth in love in a gentle, sensible, understandable manner.
• Questions are being raised within the LCMS about how we are
to relate to the ELCA in current cooperative work, such as social
service partnerships, Lutheran World Relief, Lutheran Services in
America, and Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service.
o Our Synod’s governing documents and “covenants of love”
stipulate that we will participate in world relief activities for
the alleviation of human suffering, “furthered through cooperation with Lutheran World Relief, Lutheran Immigration and
Refugee Service, Lutheran Services in America …”
o How does the ELCA action affect the future of the Recognized
Service Organization relationships that our Synod has
established with numerous inter-Lutheran Social Ministry
Organizations?
With these considerations in mind, here is my proposal:
• Establish a special task force to address concerns about 2009 ELCA
Assembly decisions/actions (as well as ongoing LCMS-ELCA relationships). The task force would include:
o The presidents of our two LCMS seminaries—Dr. Dale Meyer
and Dr. Dean Wenthe
o Two Synod Vice-Presidents—Dr. John Wohlrabe and Dr. Dean
Nadasdy
o The two CTCR staff members—Dr. Joel Lehenbauer and Rev.
Larry Vogel
o One representative from the Synod President’s office—Dr.
Samuel Nafzger
• The task force will collaborate in the preparation of materials, perhaps drafted by CTCR staff:
o To address succinctly the understanding of confessional
Lutheran identity at this time and “who we are” as a Synod in
a transparent, invitational, and appropriate manner.
o To offer a brief, substantive, readable, understandable identification of and response to theological issues related to recent
ELCA actions.
o To address theological questions and issues regarding cooperative work between LCMS and ELCA entities.
With this letter I am inviting you to accept my appointment to this
task force, which I am asking to complete its work by March 15 or
as soon thereafter as is possible, in any event in time for publication
prior to the 2010 Synod convention. I have asked Joel Lehenbauer
to serve as convener and coordinator of this task force. He will be in
touch with you soon to establish an initial meeting date. Thank you
for your willingness to accept this responsibility.
Please let me know should you have any questions or concerns
about this assignment. Blessings in Christ to all of you!
Jerry Kieschnick
Dr. Gerald B. Kieschnick, President
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

Appendix III
Statement of Task Force on Theological Implications of
ELCA Human Sexuality Decisions
Theological Implications of the 2009 ELCA Decisions
Clarity and Compassion Regarding Sexuality and Scripture

The 2009 Churchwide Assembly of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church in America (ELCA) resolved to recognize “lifelong, monogamous, same-gender relationships” and to authorize ordination into the
pastoral ministry for individuals living in such relationships.1 As the
largest Lutheran denomination in North America, the ELCA’s actions
have led to significant controversy and confusion among Lutherans.
Pastors, congregations, districts, and national leaders of The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) have encountered questions
regarding our Synod’s position on matters pertaining to homosexuality, the appropriateness of cooperative relationships among our two
church bodies, and what Lutheran identity means today.
The LCMS has consistently expressed its understanding that
same-gender sexual activity is contrary to the Scriptures.2 It has
also joined together with the other 33 members of the International
Lutheran Council in unanimously affirming that:
[T]he lifelong committed union of one man and one woman is the
place the Lord intends for human sexuality to be lived out. Biblical passages which address the practice of homosexuality do so in terms of
disapproval. Rooted in the Bible’s witness and in keeping with Christian
teaching through 2,000 years, we continue to believe that the practice
of homosexuality—in any and all situations—violates the will of the
Creator God and must be recognized as sin. 3

While the current discord in Lutheranism and other Christian traditions regarding these questions is distressing in many ways, we
believe this is also a time of opportunity. Many are asking not only
what various churches teach and practice, but are also wondering
about the theological implications of these beliefs and practices. In
debates about homosexual issues, churches have an opportunity to
testify to even more foundational truths and convictions, such as
different understandings of biblical authority and also a different
understanding of marriage. This is revelatory of something more
than matters of sexuality and sexual behavior.
The question of the Bible’s authority involves a variety of important issues such as divine and human authorship, inspiration, and
matters relating to the proper interpretation of Scripture. While a
brief statement such as this cannot fully address these many aspects
of the authority of Scripture, one issue is particularly important in
the immediate context. What is the moral authority of the Scriptures,
given that they were written millennia ago? Answers, even among
Christians, range from those who see practically no relevance to the
Bible’s direct moral assertions to those who see the Bible’s doctrines
(including its teaching about moral issues such as homosexuality) as
having full and complete authority.
Some believe that the Bible’s relevance to contemporary moral
questions is not decisive, arguing that what the Bible says is culturally bound, conditioned by the limited understanding of its human
authors. For this reason, it cannot be expected to address contemporary questions directly and with final authority. From this perspective,
the Bible’s references to homosexual conduct—which consistently
condemn homosexual acts as sinful (e.g., Lev. 18:22; Rom. 1:26–27;
1 Cor. 6:9–10)—are of limited relevance today. Those who take this
position typically argue that the authors of Scripture did not understand homosexuality as people today have come to experience it.
They assert that the biblical texts against homosexual activity only

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 14

4/15/10 2:37 PM