LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2010, Page 226

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

226

Synod Structure and Governance

8-15

To Reject Proposed Changes to Articles II, III,
and VI
Rationale
The Blue Ribbon Task Force on Synod Structure and Governance
(BRTFSSG), as part of its first two proposals to the districts of the
Synod, has proposed significant changes to the Synod’s Constitution.
The alterations in the “Provisional Proposal” for changes to the LCMS
Constitution are founded upon and thoroughly imbedded with a significant departure from the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions.
This error is simply the separation of faith from doctrine, that is, the
severing of saving faith from the object of faith and the means by
which faith is created and sustained. The separation of faith and doctrine is imbedded particularly in the proposed “Article II Confession.”
This separation between faith and doctrine is developed further in the
proposed “Article III Mission and Purpose,” and may be seen also in
the proposed “Article VI Requirement of Membership” and the proposed “Article VII Relation of the Synod and Its Members.” This
separation was scrupulously avoided in the previous Constitutions
of the Synod, as seen in comparison with the current Constitution.
The problem is that this new arrangement creates two levels of
confession: first, saving faith, and second, doctrine. Saving faith
is designated in the proposed Article II as “Confession of Faith”
(II A), and doctrine is designated as “Confessional Basis” (II B).
“Confession of Faith” (II A) is described as personal faith in Jesus
(fides qua). “Confessional Basis” (II B) speaks of Scriptures and the
Lutheran Confessions only in terms of judging faith and providing
a true exposition of the Word of God, that is, doctrine (fides quae).
The immediate result of separating doctrine (II B) from faith (II A)
is that only faith gives the things of “forgiveness of sins, eternal life,
and salvation” (II A). Doctrine (II B) is marginal or secondary to
these essential things and constitutes, in comparison to faith (II A),
a lower level concern for congregations, synods, and the church in
comparison to faith.

Church Fellowship
This separation of doctrine from faith has an extremely important
consequence for the Church (including congregations and synods)
and her fellowship. The proposed new arrangement would separate
the fellowship of the Church into two levels, corresponding to the
two levels of confession.
The primary level would be the level of saving faith, where the
so-called “unity of the church” is found (unitas; see “Congregation—
Synod—Church” [CSC]—see “Basis Theological Principles” 8, p.
10). This level would be essentially invisible, corresponding to faith
(not doctrine!), and would be the level of fellowship worked invisibly by God.
The secondary level of church fellowship would be the level of
doctrine and external church arrangements, where the so-called “unity
in the church” is found (concordia—see CSC, 8, p. 10). This level
would be essentially visible, corresponding to doctrine (not saving
faith!), and would be the level of fellowship worked by man, “which
believers seek to manifest and express in their lives and confession”
(CSC, p. 10).
This separation is illustrated sharply in the proposed “Article III
Mission and Purpose,” where under section A 1 the focus is entirely
on the “Gospel witness” and the “saving faith relationship.” No reference to purity of doctrine and practice is given here, because it

would have no relevance to faith itself because of the separation of
doctrine from faith.
Art. III A 2, as proposed, continues this point by speaking of the
“unity of the true faith in Jesus Christ,” referencing Eph. 4:3–6 and
John 17:11, 21–23. We note that this Ephesians passage was used differently in Augsburg Confession VII to speak of the Church and her
unity where “the gospel is purely preached and the holy sacraments
are administered according to the Gospel.” The proposed citation of
John 17 deliberately omits reference to verses 17–19, where Jesus
speaks of the true unity of faith in terms of the truth of His Word,
that is, pure and unadulterated doctrine. The proposed changes do not
confess that “the Gospel purely preached and the sacraments administered according to the Gospel” are necessary for the true “unity of
the church” (unitas). Instead, this proposed change constitutes a clear
rejection of this teaching of AC VII.
Proposed Art. III A 3, however, speaks of the other kind of unity,
the secondary and merely external “confessional unity within the
Synod.” Only after this other kind of unity is named does the new proposal speak of working toward church fellowship with other church
bodies and, finally, providing “a united defense against schism, sectarianism (Rom. 16:17), and heresy.” The former first priority (Art.
III 1) would be relegated to an indefinable afterthought in the second level, external unity.
In sharp contrast to this proposed new scheme, the Scriptures and
the Lutheran Confessions describe faith and its object together, distinguishing but not separating the two. Pure and unadulterated doctrine
is simply the Gospel itself, by which God creates faith, forgives sins,
bestows the Holy Spirit, gives birth to the church and her fellowship,
and saves eternally. “Pure and unadulterated” is not merely a standard
of the Law imposed by the Holy Spirit upon the Church but simply the
way of saying that we are receiving God’s Gospel in all its articles,
without any corruptions or additions to the Gospel. Church fellowship is both created and marked by the same external Sacraments and
oral Gospel that work forgiveness of sins, deliver from death and the
devil, and give eternal salvation. No human efforts, regardless of how
noble and pious, can nurture or manifest this fellowship, for it is nurtured and manifested only by the Gospel “purely preached” and the
holy Sacraments “administered according to the Gospel” (AC VII).
The current Constitution’s Objective 1, “Conserve and promote the
unity of the true faith,” etc., simply refers to the due diligence given
to keeping our doctrine pure and free from error, corruptions, additions, or omissions.

Pure Doctrine
This separation of faith and doctrine, which attaches faith only to
the personal confession (“saving faith relationship” of a minimized
Second Article of the Creed), is a new kind of Gospel reductionism,
the idea that only certain narrow teachings about Christ constitute the
essential Gospel, and that all else is secondary in importance for salvation. In other words, when doctrine is separated from faith, purity
of doctrine can no longer be a concern for the preservation and distribution of God’s saving work (Gospel). It becomes essentially a legal
requirement (Law) that measures obedience.
One clear consequence of this change is that purity of doctrine
and practice would be relegated to a lower level of importance in
the proposed changes to the Constitution. The current “Article III
Objectives” of the Synod begins with this primary objective:
1. Conserve and promote the unity of the true faith (Eph. 4:3–6; 1 Cor.
1:10), work through its official structure toward fellowship with
other Christian church bodies, and provide a united defense against
schism, sectarianism (Rom. 16:17), and heresy.

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 226

4/15/10 2:39 PM