LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1998, Page 158

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

158 THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

Christians who hold a scriptural view of the nature and benefits of
the Sacrament and for whom there are no scriptural grounds to
deny the Sacrament; and

WHEREAS, This convention interpretation further increases ten-
sion within our Synod by serving as a basis for supervisory and
brotherly evaluation and admonition not always supported by
Scripture and the Confessions; and

WHEREAS, Synod’s present practice of close Communion is de-
fined primarily in terms of denominational affiliation (an applica-
tion regarding which Scripture does not clearly inform us) rather
than a definition identifying the need for a common scriptural un-
derstanding of the nature and benefits of the Sacrament (repentance
of sin, belief in Jesus as Savior, trust in his words “given and shed
for you for the forgiveness of sins,” belief that Christ’s body and
blood are truly present in the sacrament, understanding and con-
fession of the Christian faith, and ability to examine oneself): and

WHEREAS, Synod’s pastors, who have been trained and certified
by our Synod to be responsible servants of the Word and described
as being “stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Cor. 4:1) are in the
best position to apply the Gospel (including the Sacrament of the
Altar) in the most appropriate way for the eternal welfare of souls
that come under their care; therefore be it

Resolved, That the entire second “Resolved” of 1986 Res. 3-08
and quoted in 1995 Res. 3-08 be rescinded; and be it further

Resolved, That it be considered appropriate for congregations
and pastors of the Synod to commune baptized Christians holding a
common scriptural understanding of the nature and benefits of the
Lord’s Supper as described in the sixth “Whereas” above, including
the doctrine of the real presence; and be it finally

Resolved, That for the sake of faithfulness to Scripture and the
spiritual welfare of those communing, the pastors and congrega-
tions of the Synod be urged to follow a Communion practice which
avoids the extremes of being too “closed” or not “closed” enough.

Good Shepherd
Edgewood. NM

3-14

To Commune Those Who Accept Real Presence

WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod has opposed
efforts to unite Christians at the Lord’s Table through doctrinal
compromise; and

WHEREAS, The Prussian Union of 1817, which allowed Luther-
ans and Calvinists to celebrate Holy Communion together, was re-
garded as “unionism” by our Missouri Synod forebears, and dis-
couraged the Synod from pursuing fellowship with other
Christians; and

Wuereas, Much of the doctrinal compromise of the past has
now given way to seeking doctrinal agreement through bilateral di-
alogues by a number of denominations, together with the full par-
ticipation of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod; and

WHEREAS, The following quotations from dialogues indicate an
emerging consensus on the presence of Christ in the Sacrament of
Holy Communion:

“We affirm that in the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper Jesus
Christ, true God and true man, is present wholly and entirely, in
his body and blood, under the signs of bread and wine”
(Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogue);

“The Sacrament is a means of grace. The assurance of his
presence is given in the self-witness of Christ in the instituting
rite: This is my body, this is my blood. The worthy participant is
the one who receives in faith and repentance the Christ who of-
fers himself in the sacrament. The total Christ. the divine-human
person is present in the sacrament, but it does not explain how
he is present’”’(Lutheran-Reformed dialogue).

“We confess and affirm that the ‘once-for-all-time’ offering
of Christ, his body and blood, which has overcome the reign of
sin and death is present, distributed to and received by all who

participate in the Eucharist meal. Faith trusts the promise that

; sin is forgiven” (Lutheran-Episcopal dialogue):
and

WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod has devel-
oped guidelines for administering Holy Communion by military
and institutional chaplains which also apply to campus pastors, al-
lowing people to receive the Sacrament who “hold the essence of
the Christian faith, including the doctrines of the real presence and
the Lord's Supper as a means of grace’; therefore be it

Resolved, That we give praise to God the Holy Spirit for the
amount of agreement on the sacramental presence of Christ which
has been realized: and be it further

Resolved, That, on the basis of this emerging doctrinal agree-
ment and the precedent set by military, institutional, and campus
clergy—as well as our Lord’s invitation and command to “do
this’—we welcome to the Lord’s Table those who “hold the
essence of the Christian faith, including the doctrine of the real
presence and of the Lord's Supper as a means of grace.”

Resurrection
Coronado, CA

3-15

To Express Concern and Encourage Appropriate
Response to Those Associated with “A Declaration
of Eucharistic Understanding and Practice”

WHEREAS, Our Synod has on many occasions reaffirmed the
practice of close(d) Communion as biblical and loving and has en-
couraged all our congregations to practice close(d) Communion;
and

Wuereas. A group within the LCMS states that they believe
there should be no “denominational requirement on baptized Chris-
tians” who desire to receive the body and blood of Christ in the
Lord’s Supper (point 6 of “A Declaration of Eucharistic Under-
standing and Practice”); and

WuerEaS, Denomination affiliation does represent acceptance
of that denomination’s belief; and

WHEREAS, The policy of communing “baptized Christians” who
consent to the basic idea of the Christological presence in the
Sacrament and are repentant, but who do not belong to a denomi-
nation in altar and pulpit fellowship with the LCMS is not in ac-
cord with our Synod’s understanding of close(d) Communion
which teaches that those of a different confession of faith be de-
nied the Sacrament because “the Lord’s Supper is a testimony to
the unity of faith” (Explanation of Small Catechism, question 305
C) — except for extreme cases of pastoral necessity which are by
their very nature rare: and

WHEREAS, The Praesidium of the LCMS in a public statement
made about this group stated, “We regret the fact that some mem-
bers of our synodical family have persisted in the advocacy of an
erroneous position in regard to close(d) Communion. Sadly, they
have done this in spite of the fraternal, pastoral, and faithful admo-
nition of our Synod’s President, and of our Synod’s District Presi-
dents”; and

WuerEAS, Such public statements which openly contradict the
stated doctrine and practice of the LCMS are destructive to the
unity of the church, cause further schism, and lead the weak and
undiscerning into error; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod in convention express concern and
sorrow that such a public display of schismatic doctrine and prac-
tice should be encouraged by any group within the LCMS, and be it
further

Resolved, That the Synod in convention enjoin those in posi-
tions of ecclesiastical supervision to take the necessary steps ac-
cording to synodical procedure for calling those erring members of
this group to repentance and if necessary (that is, if repentance for
this public sin is refused) take the corresponding following steps
to remove them from synodical membership; and be it finally