LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2001, Page 168

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

168 THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

Resolved, That a resolution defining these terms be presented
in the next synodical convention so that there will be a unified de-
finition of these terms and a unified practice of close(d) Commu-
nion among the congregations of our Synod.

Zion
Tomball, TX

3-38

To Encourage Review of Communion
Hospitality Policies
WuereasS, Past conventions of the Synod have adopted resolu-

tions on admission to Holy Communion by the congregations of
Synod; and

WHEREAS, These resolutions have stated that only communi-
cants belonging to synodical congregations or congregations in fel-
lowship with Synod should be communed, while at the same time
recognizing that emergency or pastoral care situations establish the
necessity of making exceptions to the general policy; and

Wuereas, There is considerable disagreement with this posi-
tion in the Synod today; and

Wuereas, The CTCR has recently completed a study of this
question and released its report to the Synod (Admission to the
Lord’s Supper, November 1999); and

WHEREAS, The CTCR report so strongly emphasizes the con-
fessional dimension of Holy Communion, sometimes without pro-
viding a clear scriptural and confessional warrant, that little room
appears to be left for congregations to follow a more evangelical
practice of Communion hospitality which they believe the Scrip-
tures allow them to do (example: The CTCR states, “We ask at
times that those who may have genuine faith and who if they were
to commune in our churches might do so in a worthy manner, still
not commune at our altars because of other doctrinal disagreements
between their church bodies and our own Synod.” p. 41); and

WHEREAS, The synodical Constitution (Art. VII) recognizes that
our individual congregations are self-governing under the Word of
God and therefore do not need to follow a synodical resolution if
the congregation does not consider it to be “in accordance with the
Word of God or if it appears inexpedient as far as the condition of
the congregation is concerned”; therefore be it

Resolved, That the congregations and pastors of the Synod con-
tinue to review their Communion hospitality policies to make sure
they are faithful to Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions,
using synodical resolutions, CTCR documents, and other materi-
als for information and guidance as they do so; and be it further

Resolved, That all synodical congregations, assisted by their
pastors, exercise their rights and responsibilities as self-governing
congregations under the Word of God to establish and maintain an
evangelical practice of Communion hospitality that makes the
Lord’s Supper available to all those for whom the Lord intended
It.

Concordia, Kirkwood, MO; St. Matthew, Huber Heights,
OH; Our Shepherd, Cambridge. MD

3-39
To Adopt Policy re Admission to Lord’s Supper

WHEREAS, There is confusion in our Synod regarding what con-
stitutes a uniform and responsible policy for determining admis-
sion to Communion rails; and

WHEREAS, Other Lutherans of an earlier time also wrestled with
this question and found a workable resolution in the Krauth Rule of
1872 (which was later adopted by the General Council in 1875 as
the Galesburg Rule):

1.) The Rule is: ... Lutheran altars are for Lutheran commu-
nicanis only. 2.) The exceptions to the rule belong lo the sphere
of privilege and not of right. 3.) The determination of the ex-
ceptions is to be made in consonance with these principles by

2001 Convention Workbook

the conscientious judgment of pastors, as these cases arise
(Wolf, Documents of Lutheran Unity in America [Philadelphia:
Fortress, 1966], 78):

and

Wuereas, Our Synod teaches that it is an improper policy to
deny the Holy Supper to anyone based on denominational affilia-
tion alone, as our textbooks advise our congregations:

They must guard against denying the Sacrament to those
Christians for whom Christ has appointed it (Francis Picper,
Christian Dogmatics [St. Louis: Concordia, 1953], 3:381);
and

WHEREAS, It is, therefore, our intention and practice to admin-
ister the Holy Supper to all who sincerely desire it and have a
proper (Lutheran) understanding of it (that is, they know what they
seek and why they come); therefore be it

Resolved, That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod adopt
the following as a uniform and responsible policy for admitting
communicants to our Communion rails:

1. Our policy is: Lutheran altars are for Lutheran communicants
only.

2. The exceptions to the policy belong to the sphere of privilege
and not of right.

3. The determination of the exceptions is to be made in conso-
nance with these principles by the conscientious judgment of pas-
tors, as these cases arise.

Zion
Piedmont, CA

3-40

To Affirm Pastoral Communion Practices

Wuereas, Our Lord Jesus Christ taught by word and example
that His followers are to treat people in need with compassion re-
gardless of their condition or theological position: “But go and
learn what this means: ‘I desire mercy, not sacrifice.’ For | have
not come to call the righteous, but sinners” (Matt. 9:13 NIV);
“Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who
fell into the hands of robbers?” The expert in the law replied, “The
one who had mercy on him.” Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise”
(Luke 10:36-—37 NIV); The Samaritan woman said to Him, “You
are a Jew and I am a Samaritan woman. How can you ask me fora
drink?” (For Jews do not associate with Samaritans.) Jesus an-
swered her, “If you knew the gift of God and who it is that asks
you for a drink, you would have asked Him and He would have
given you living water” (John 4:9-10 NIV); and

WHEREAS, Our Lord Jesus Christ prayed for the unity of His
church as essential for its witness to the world: “[I pray] that all of
them may be one, Father, just as You are in Me and I am in You.
May they also be in us so that the world may believe that You have
sent Me” (John 17:21 NIV); and

WHEREAS, Our Lord Jesus Christ recognized exceptions based
on individual needs and circumstances: The Pharisees said to Him,
“Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?” He
answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his
companions were hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the
high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated
bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave
some to his companions.” Then He said to them, “The Sabbath was
made for man, not man for the Sabbath” (Mark 2:24—27 NIV); and

WHEREAS, In the Lutheran Confessions the reformers speak
clearly on the issue of inclusion and exclusion from the Lord's
Supper: Those who are shameless and unruly must be told to stay
away, for they are not fit to receive the forgiveness of sins since
they do not desire it and do not want to be good. The others, who
are not so callous and dissolute but would like to be good, should
not absent themselves, even though in other respects they are weak
and frail. As St. Hilary has said, “Unless a man has committed such
a sin that he has forfeited the name of Christian and has to be ex-
pelled from the congregation, he should not exclude himself from