LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2010, Page 16

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

16

SYNOD REPORTS

what do they mean for our involvement in inter-Lutheran cooperative relationships and activities with the ELCA?
We must first address an immediate result of the ELCA decisions.
Contacts from ELCA individuals and congregations with LCMS congregations and officials have increased significantly since August
2009. Many are asking about the differences between the LCMS
and the ELCA on sexuality issues. Others are considering or have
decided to leave the ELCA. We will not encourage discord in the
ELCA, but we cannot turn away from those who dissent from ELCA
decisions regarding human sexuality. To do so would be to deny our
own convictions. We will welcome ELCA Lutherans and congregations who consider membership in our churches and denomination
and will encourage the cause of Confessional Lutheranism worldwide. This includes seeking to speak charitably and truthfully about
the differences between our churches on scriptural authority and the
implications this has for sexuality and other issues.15
A second result of ELCA decisions has been increasing questions
from within the LCMS regarding the future of cooperative relationships between the ELCA and LCMS in inter-Lutheran agencies and
organizations devoted to works of mercy and relief for those in need.
In order to attempt to address this complex question, it is first helpful
to recognize that cooperative efforts involving human care for those
in need are based on the sharing of a common goal, not on complete
doctrinal unity.16 This has been the understanding of the LCMS historically. The CTCR’s report Theology of Fellowship summarizes
this position as follows:
Our Synod should clearly recognize that, in cases of necessary work
on the local, national, or international level, where the faith and confession of the church are not compromised, and where it appears essential
that the churches of various denominations should cooperate or at least
not work at cross purposes, our churches ought to cooperate willingly to
the extent that the Word of God and conscience will allow.17

It may be helpful to identify two fundamental principles in this
quotation from Theology of Fellowship. First, the church cannot compromise its faith and confession. The church’s confession of faith
is essential to its very existence, for the church’s central purpose is
proclaiming the Gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ and administering His sacraments. Indeed, the church, in its essence, is nothing
more than “the assembly of all believers among whom the gospel is
purely preached and the holy sacraments are administered according to the gospel.”18
The second principle affirms circumstances in which churches
“ought to cooperate” “to the extent that the Word of God and conscience will allow.” That is, while we dare not compromise the
confession of the Gospel, neither may we completely isolate from
other Christian churches, as if we recognize no truths in common and
share no common goals.
In light of these two principles, it has been the longstanding practice of confessional Lutheran churches to distinguish between joint
participation by churches and church workers in Word and Sacrament
ministry (“altar and pulpit fellowship” or communio in sacris) and
cooperation between churches in matters of physical need (cooperatio in externis).19 To maintain such a distinction carefully and
conscientiously prevents both compromise of the teachings of the
Christian faith and disregard of human needs which can be addressed
more effectively by groups working together than by individuals or
churches working on their own.
Because of doctrinal differences, the LCMS is not now nor has
it ever been able to be in a relationship of altar and pulpit fellowship
with the ELCA. Nevertheless, we have engaged in many cooperative activities with the ELCA, nationally and locally, in order to meet

physical needs. These cooperative activities, however, are threatened
by the sexuality decisions of the ELCA because, in some cases, the
ELCA’s new affirmation of same-gender relationships may contradict understandings or goals that have enabled cooperative activities
in the past. As one example, the CTCR already in 2006 addressed the
decision of an adoption agency to treat same-gender relationships as
equal to marriage for adoptive purposes. The opinion states: “On the
basis of the clear teaching of Scripture regarding homosexual behavior and about God’s will and design for marriage and the family as
foundational units for society as a whole, it is the express opinion
of the CTCR that a policy of placing adopted or foster children into
homosexual contexts would stand in opposition to the official doctrinal position of the LCMS.”20
In areas where we currently have working arrangements with
ELCA congregations and entities, the status of those working relationships is dependent on policies and actions taken by the various
entities from national to local levels. We do not believe the ELCA’s
recent sexuality decisions should necessarily or summarily end our
work together in these agencies. However, we hope and expect that
the leadership of such entities will respect the theological position
of the Synod (including its position on same-gender sexual activity)
and avoid any policies or decisions which would require us to cease
our support and involvement in their activities.
We cannot dictate the exact direction(s) various cooperative
relationships will take in the future, primarily because the nature
of agreements between ELCA and LCMS congregations and entities varies on a case-by-case basis. Frank and serious discussion on
this issue needs to continue on various levels so that convictions and
beliefs are not compromised and that worthy projects, activities, and
relationships between our church and others may continue wherever
possible. We urge LCMS participants in such cases to make decisions
about whether to continue involvement on the basis of the principles
we have discussed. We also suggest the following questions for consideration in making these decisions:
Is the purpose of the joint work fully consistent with the positions,
policies, and objectives of the Synod?
Do cooperative efforts imply doctrinal unity with the ELCA or
endorsement of ELCA positions on same-sex relationships or other matters of disagreement with the LCMS?
Does the joint agency or organization distinguish itself as an entity
from the churches that support it?
Are all the policies and programs of the organization consonant with
the doctrinal position of the LCMS?
Do the individuals who lead the organization openly support and
encourage efforts, positions, or policies which compromise the theological stance of the Synod?

We urge LCMS participants to answer such questions as these
and to make decisions about whether to continue involvement on the
basis of the principles we have discussed.
Lutheran Identity in a Time of Confusion

In a time of such controversy between Lutheran churches, even
more important questions emerge.21 Who speaks for Lutherans today?
If Lutheran churches are divided on issues of sexuality, does this mean
sexual morality is an open question for Lutheran theology? In light
of the Great Commission to proclaim the Gospel to a dying world,
what does it mean to be Lutheran today and does it really matter?
The assertions of this document may appear as only one voice in an
intra-family argument unless we also address the matter of Lutheran
identity. One way to reaffirm and to summarize what it is to be
Lutheran Christians is by first respectfully recognizing two prominent

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 16

4/15/10 2:37 PM