LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1971, Page 50

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

PRESIDENT’S REPORT

Sent to Reconcile

ja keeping with the duties assigned to the office of
the President by the Constitution and Bylaws of The
Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod, I would like to
take this opportunity to offer the delegates a brief over-
view of the major issues facing this convention during
fie coming week. My remarks follow the general order
of materials presented in the convention Workbook and
center on the convention theme, Sent TO RECONCILE.

{. Our Message: The Pure Word of Reconciliation

Comyaittee 2 deals with theological and doctrinal
raatters. Such matters are not merely the concern of
pastors and professors. Theology and doctrine are fun-
damental to our entire task, for doctrine is nothing less
than the articulation of the message of reconciliation
in Jesus Christ. Because of the great importance of the
doctrinal concerns facing us, I will speak on these mat-
ters first and at some length.

God’s Word says: “Now we have received not the
spirit of the world but the spirit which is of God; that
we might know the things that are freely given to us
of God. Which things also we speak not in the words
which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy
Ghost teacheth, comparing spiritual things with spir-
itual.” (1 Cor. 2:12-13)

As Paul points out, the message of the cross must
be preached in all its purity, for the church’s message
is not the message of man or the wisdom of man, but
the wisdom and the oracles of God. Therefore we can
never become indifferent to the doctrine which is taught
in our schools and proclaimed from our pulpits. We
cannot act as if truth and falsehood are the same, or as
if truth is only relative and can never be stated cor-
rectly and categorically. We simply must be and re-
main concerned about pure doctrine.

It is no secret that in our time we have certain doc-
trinal problems within our church. A person would
have to be blind to deny it. On the one hand, it can be
pointed out that doctrinal controversy is the sign of
a living and concerned church. It can also be said that
no church is ever totally free of doctrinal controversy.
Yet as Paul says, “Let a man so account of us as of the
ministers of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of
God” (1 Cor. 4:1). As church leaders, we are all stew-
ards of this Word and must constantly strive for faith-
fulness to it.

As we consider this matter which has received so
much attention in the overtures brought before our
convention, we need to make certain basics quite clear.
In the first place, we must maintain with Luther in the
Smalcald Articles that “the Word of God alone should
establish articles of faith and no one else, not even an
angel” (SA-II If 15). No church or synod creates or
establishes doctrine. Only the Word does this. Dr.
C. F. W. Walther, in his presidential address to the

Synod in 1848, made this point clear beyond debate.
The Word alone establishes our faith.

In the second place, we must address ourselves to
the relationship between Article 1 of the Constitution
and the status of doctrinal statements and resolutions
adopted by the Synod. The problem really boils down
to our understanding of the Constitution. Article if of
the Constitution states in simple language what “Synod
and every member of Synod accepts without reserva-
tion”: “The Scriptures of the Old and New Testament
as the written Word of God and the only rule and
norm of faith and of practice” and “all the Symbolical
Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church as a true
and unadulterated statement and exposition of the Word
of God.”

But some seem inclined to believe that the Synod
must hold the Lutheran Confessions to be in effect
an exhaustive and in fact a comprehensive list of the
articles of faith. Some specifically suggest that the
Augsburg Confession prescribes a quantitative total of
articles of faith which Lutherans must accept. Accord-
ing to this view, Lutherans are not bound by anything
that Scripture teaches unless it is at least implicitly
taught in the Augsburg Confession or the Book of Con-
cord. However, it is very clear from the writings of Dr.
Walther that the actual intent of Article II is that the
Synod holds Scripture to be the only rule and norm of
faith and practice, and therefore the Synod accepts only
what the Scripture teaches, but also everything and
anything that Scripture teaches. Moreover, the Synod
holds that the Lutheran Confessions are a faithful and
correct presentation of the teachings of Scripture on
those articles of faith which the circumstances of the
time made it necessary to treat. Therefore the Synod
endorses everything the Confessions say on these points
as a correct exposition of Scripture, without in the least
implying that in the Confessions there is a deliberate
silence on certain doctrinal matters in order to leave
such areas open for latitude and diversity and that con-
sequently Synod may never adopt a firm position on
any matter which is not already settled in the 16th-cen-
tury confessional writings.

Such an understanding of our confessional commit-
ment is radically different from the intention of Article
Il of our Constitution. It is ironic that some of those
who accuse the Synod of “traditionalism” are in a sense
promoting it by elevating the Confessions above the
Scriptures. For it is “traditionalism” of the worst kind
to ask merely whether a teaching is contained in the
confessional writings rather than whether it is taught
by the Scriptures. Such a practice is contrary to our
confessional position itself that only the Word of God.
can establish articles of faith. Moreover, it is an im-
proper use of Article II of the Synod’s Constitution,
because it allows paragraph 2 of Article II (which deals
with our confessional commitment) to nullify paragraph
1 (which expresses our commitment to the Scriptures).