LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2001, Page 198

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

198 THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

22:5 forbids it (Hebrew keli-geber, “mighty man” or “warrior’’)]
and accompanies Barak only to Mt. Tabor, not to the battlefield.
Barak wins the victory, and the rebuke for his recalcitrance comes
when a woman, Jael, slays the fleeing enemy commander with a
household too! in a home, not on a battlefield); and

WHEREAS, Scripture scorns the use of woman as warrior (Is.
19:16; Jer. 50:31; 51:30; Nahum 3:13; etc.); and

WHEREAS, By sending women as warriors to defend men, God’s
design is violated and women’s glory is diminished; and

WHEREAS, The designation of woman as warrior involves par-
ticipation in the cultural inversion of male and female roles con-
ceived by the Creator and represents a misuse of women in defi-
ance of the Creator’s purpose; and

WHEREAS, The increased promotion given to feminist egalitari-
anism distorts or neglects the glad harmony of roles between the
sexes portrayed in Scripture; and

WHEREAS, It is a strike at the natural order and harmony willed
by the Creator to blur the inter-sexual distinction established by
God in which woman was created to be a vessel for life, not an in-
strument of death and destruction; and

WHEREAS, Distinctions in male/female rolcs are ordained by
God as part of the created order; and

WHEREAS, A denial or neglect of such distinctions leads to de-
structive consequences in family. church, and society; and

WHEREAS, Prior to 1993 American women, by public policy and
federal legislation (WASA), were prohibited from participation in
military combat roles; and

WHEREAS, In 1993 America’s Secretary of Defense issued an
order containing the words “develop a legislative proposal to re-
peal the existing Combat Exclusion Law (CEL) and permit the as-
signment of women to ships that are engaged in combat missions”;
and

WHEREAS, In 1994 the U.S. Army was ordered to open Combat
Military Occupation Specialties to women; and

Wuereas, Our church’s military chaplains and leaders are being
questioned regarding (and are questioning) the silence of our
church regarding the radical cultural shift in our nation’s policy and
law relative to the combat role of our church’s women in national
defense; and

WHEREAS, Current public policy regarding the assignment of
women to combat roles in national defense reflects the unscriptural
principle that differences between the sexes are social constructs
not reflections of God’s order of creation, giving rise to abominable
pagan concepts of gender neutrality, nonsexual differentiation, and
sexual sameness; therefore be it

Resolved, That the President of the Synod direct the Commis-
sion on Theology and Church Relations to examine the theologi-
cal/doctrinal implications of current national policy impacting
women of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod serving as com-
bat warriors and provide to our church a reasoned scriptural re-
sponse.

First English Church
Spring Valley, MN

3-125

To Require Male Theology Professors

WHEREAS, The apostle Paul wrote by inspiration that a woman
should neither teach nor exercise authority over men in church
(1 Tim. 2:11—15); and

WHEREAS, A college professor teaching theology to male stu-
dents both “teaches” and “has authority” over those males; and

WHEREAS, Whether this college protessorship is held to be a
function of the pastoral office or an auxiliary office in the church, it
cannot be exercised by a woman without violating apostolic and
scriptural injunctions; therefore be it

Resolved, That the 2001 convention declare that in the colleges
and universities of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod all pro-

2001 Convention Workbook

fessors whose responsibility it 1s to teach theology to male students
will be males graduated from a synodical seminary or colloquized
into the Synod.

Salem, Taylorsville, NC; Our Savior, Cupertino, CA;

3-126

To Reject Women’s Suffrage

WHEREAS, It is a general principle of the Holy Scriptures that
the woman should not usurp authority over the man either in the
home or in the church; and

WHEREAS, Our Synod has historically and consistently based its
teaching about women’s suffrage on the clear passages of the Bible
that deal with the issue, including | Cor. 14:34 and 1 Tim. 2:11-12;
and

WHEREAS, Dr. P. E. Kretzmann commenting on | Tim. 2:9-15
says, “In no way and at no time shall the woman exercise dominion
over the man, neither in public, by presuming to be a public
teacher, nor at home, nor in any other sphere of activity”; and

WHEREAS, Dr. Francis Pieper in his Christian Dogmatics writes,
“1 Cor. 14 and 1 Tim. 2 are not dealing with a temporary, Oriental
order, but with a universal, permanent order”; and

WHEREAS, The exegetical department of our seminary in Fort
Wayne in 1976, responding to the question “Does female suffrage
in the church (granting women the right to vote) agree with the
Word of God, or is it contrary to it?” responded as follows: “After
careful study of the testimony of the Sacred Scriptures, the exeget-
ical department unanimously concludes that female suffrage in the
church is definitely contrary to the Word of God”; and

WHEREAS, That same exegetical department further declared:
“Woman must not be permitted to exercise authority over man.
Since any vote is an exercise of authority, female suffrage gives
woman authority over man. A woman exercises authority over men
every time her vote contributes to the passage or defeat of some
measure on which men voted the opposite way. So a woman, by
voting in the assembly, continually exercises authority over men”;
and

WHEREAS, From 1847 to 1969 the LCMS followed the clear
teaching of the Scriptures and the church fathers in rejecting
women’s suffrage in the voters’ assembly; therefore be it

Resolved, That we repent of our sins in allowing women’s suf-
frage in the voters’ assemblies of our congregations and return to
the biblical and historic position of the LCMS.

Trinity
Bridgeton, MO

3-127

To Require Disassociation from Renewal in Missouri

WHEREAS, Renewal in Missouri (R.1.M.), issued chiefly by pas-
tors of the LCMS, seeks to make the charismatic movement ac-
ceptable to the LCMS; and

WHEREAS, The R.LM Newsletter claims that more LCMS pas-
tors are becoming interested in R./.M.’s charismatic position; and

WHEREAS, The CTCR has in the past thoroughly studicd the cn-
tire charismatic movement and has found it fraught with false doc-
trine (1972; 1977; 1994); and

WHEREAS, The CTCR has, in its convention report, found Re-
newal in Missouri (R.1.M) to be at odds with the doctrinal position
of the LCMS; and

WHEREAS, Welcome, Holy Spirit, edited by Larry Christenson
(Augsburg, 1987), was co-authored also by founding members of
Renewal in Missouri (R.1.M.) and is promoted at times by Renewal
in Missouri (R.1.M.); and

WHEREAS, Welcome, Holy Spirit seriously misleads the church
about the nature and sources of true renewal and unity, by identi-
fying such renewal and unity with the progress of the pente-