LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1998, Page 197

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 197

ment of belief, commend Dr. Walter Lang for his many years of
defending creation and opposing evolution, and ask Concordia
Publishing House to publish Brian Young’s book Doubts about
Creation—Not After This! and encourage all LCMS schools to use
It.
Trinity, New Haven, MO; Washington Circuit, Missouri
District; Trinity, Denver, CO

3-147

To Delete Article and Bylaw on Dissent

WHEREAS, Since “‘the purpose [of voting in matters of doctrine}
is not to decide the correctness of a doctrine by majority vote or
even by unanimous vote” and “The orthodox Christian Church re-
mains aware of the fact that it cannot by resolution make or give
birth to Christian doctrines” (Pieper, III, p. 430), it therefore begs
the question for Synod or Districts in convention to assume the af-
firmative votes reflect scriptural teaching and the negative votes
non-scriptural teaching; and

WHEREAS, Walther’s words in his 1848 synodical address,
“Clearly, according to the constitution we have no right to draw up
decrees. to issue laws and ordinances, and to pass judgment on any
matter that imposes something on the congregation or to which the
congregation must unconditionally submit,” and “There may al-
ways be congregations who use their freedom to reject our propos-
als, even when these proposals are beneficial to them” (CTM, vol.
XLIII, 7, p. 431) make sense only if Walther is assuming that
Synod and Districts pass resolutions concerning matters not com-
manded or forbidden by God; and

WHEREAS, Synod’s current Bylaws, on the one hand, provide a
quatenus subscription to doctrinal resolutions (“Such resolutions
. .. are to be honored and upheld until such time as the Synod
amends or repeals them” [1.09 b, 7])}—a subscription which Pieper
says is “at bottom, in conflict with common honesty and upright-
ness” (I, p. 356)—and on the other hand those same Bylaws de-
mand that these doctrinal resolutions be honored and upheld pub-
licly—something that puts them in fact on the same level as those
confessional items contained in Art. I] of Synod’s Constitution,
though they are nowhere mentioned in Art. II; therefore be it

Resolved, That Art. 1.09 and Art. 2.39 of Synod’s Bylaws be
deleted and that no doctrinal resolutions be voted upon at District
and synodical conventions.

Mt. Zion
Minneapolis, MN

3-148

To Respond to Dissent from “Synod’s Position”

Wuereas, The 1995 convention resolved (3-05) “That mem-
bers of the Synod who are convinced that woman’s suffrage does
not lie in the area of Christian freedom but is contrary to the Word
of God, be urged to make use of the established procedures for ex-
pressing dissent” (Bylaw 2.39); and

WHEREAS, The Synod at the same time resolved “that honest
Christian conscience can and does exist on both sides of this issue,
but such difference of opinion is not divisive of Christian fellow-
ship”; and

WuereEas, A number of members of the Synod have submitted
to the CTCR a statement of dissent to the Synod’s current position
permitting woman suffrage, including references to exegetical stud-
ies not available when the Synod changed its position on this mat-
ter in 1969; and

WHEREAS, The Commission on Constitutional Matters ruled on
Oct. 23, 1996, based on Bylaws 1.09 b and 2.39 b and c, that in the
eventuality that “neither the dissenter or the Synod has changed,”

“The dissenter may decline to practice woman suffrage, but may
not persist in teaching that it is contrary to the Scriptures”; and

WHEREAS, Bylaw 2.39 c states in part, “If such resolutions are
of a doctrinal nature, dissent is to be ... brought to the attention of
the Commission on Theology and Church Relations before finding
expression as an overture to the convention calling for revision or
recision”; and

Wuereas, The Synod is not allowed to change its doctrinal po-
sition unless it is convinced from the Scriptures, the Lutheran Con-
fessions, and/or logical deductions from these norms; and

WuerEaS, The CCM opinion would prevent dissenters from
bringing to the Synod’s attention their reasons to request a change
in the Synod’s position, therefore making such a change almost im-
possible; and

WHEREAS, There are no statements in the Bylaws instructing the
CTCR when, how, or even if it should respond to formal statements
of dissent to synodical resolutions; therefore be it

Resolved, That the CTCR be instructed to make at least a pre-
liminary theological response to each formal statement of dissent it
receives within one year of receipt, using assistance from the sem-
inaries, if necessary, and publish any formal statements of dissent
which it receives, along with any response it makes in the next
Convention Workbook, so that the Synod can have the opportunity
to evaluate its position and, if necessary, make changes; and be it
further

Resolved, That the Oct. 23, 1996 CCM opinion that dissenters
“may not persist in teaching that [woman suffrage] is contrary to
the Scriptures” be considered null and void until their statement of
dissent has been heard by the Synod, and the Synod in convention
has an opportunity to respond to their dissent and to any response
the CTCR may make; and be it finally

Resolved, That in light of the long-standing difference of opin-
ion concerning woman suffrage, all members of Synod be urged to
listen to people with whom they disagree and be ready to speak the
truth in love at all times.

Quincy Circuit Forum
Central Illinois District

3-149

To Remove Assignment on Study
of Inerrancy of Scripture
WHEREAS, The Synod at its 1973 convention requested that the
CTCR “conduct an intensive study of the doctrine of inerrancy and

also of the traditional interpretation of Genesis 1-3 and the inter-
pretation of the Book of Jonah” (1973 Proceedings, 46); and

WHEREAS, The Commission on Theology and Church Relations,
in view of more pressing assignments, has asked that this assign-
ment be removed from its agenda; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod grant the CTCR’s request to remove
the study on inerrancy called for by the 1973 convention from its
agenda.

Commission on Theology and Church Relations

3-150

To Request Faculty and Board of Directors
of Valparaiso to Confess and Practice
Doctrinal Positions of Lutheran Confessions

WHEREAS, Valparaiso University was established as a Lutheran
university with ties to The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod; and

WuereEas, Valparaiso University recruits students and funds
from LCMS congregations; and