LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2001, Page 257

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

STRUCTURE, PLANNING, AND ADMINISTRATION 257

Resolved, That the Florida-Georgia District expresses its con-
cern regarding the opinion of the CCM of Sept. 14, 1999, for it se-
riously threatens and violates the clear and precious guarantees of
our synodical Constitution; and be it further

Resolved, That the Florida-Georgia District convention memo-
nalize the 2001 convention of the Synod to revisit this ruling.

Florida-Georgia District

7-59

To Clarify Role of Doctrinal
Resolutions and Statements

Rationale

Throughout the history of our Synod we have never been cer-
tain as to how we deal with resolutions that seek to define doctrine.
We commit ourselves to the Scriptures and the Confessions as the
only source of doctrine. Then we spend a great deal of time over
the years defining just what a doctrinal resolution is. On the one
hand we assert that “doctrinal questions are only settled by the
Word of God.” On the other hand we assert that “one must honor
and uphold resolutions of the Synod.” Now we find ourselves in a
situation in which we have both doctrinal resolutions and doctrinal
statements. Both of these can be adopted by a simple majority of
the Synod and presumably can be rescinded by the same simple
majority. It would certainly seem that this is a very insecure doc-
trinal base.

The simplest solution is to go back to the beginning. This would
require the following resolution:

Resolved, That we rescind Res. 2.12 of the 1971 convention,
which would change the wording of Bylaw 1.09 c; and be it fur-
ther

Resolved, That Bylaw 1.09 be revised to read “such adopted and
ratified doctrinal statements shall be regarded as the position of the
Synod in convention and shall be ‘accepted as helpful expositions
and explanations’™ as it states in the Formula of Concord, Solid
Declaration, Rule and Norm 10.

Trinity
Walnut Creek, CA

7-60

To Amend Bylaw 1.09 re Doctrinal Resolutions

WHEREAS, Art. II of the Constitution of The Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod states: “The Synod, and every member of the
Synod, accepts without reservation:

1. The Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament as the
written Word of God and the only rule and norm of faith and
practice;

2. All the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran
Church as a true and unadulterated statement and exposition of
the Word of God, to wit: the three Ecumenical Creeds (the
Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed), the
Unaltered Augsburg Confession, the Smatlcald Articles, the
Large Catechism of Luther, the Small Catechism of Luther, and
the Formula of Concord”; and

Wuereas, Art. VII C of the same Constitution also states: “All
matters of doctrine and conscience shall be decided only by the
Word of God”; and

Wuereas, The Formula of Concord, with reference to Dr. Mar-
tin Luther’s Opera Latina (Latin Works) states that the Reformer
himself “expressly asserts by way of distinction that the Word of
God is and should remain the sole rule and norm of all doctrine,
and that no human being’s writings dare be put on a par with it, but
that everything must be subjected to it” (FC SD 9); and

WuereEaS, Bylaw 1.09 a in the Handbook of The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod (1998 edition) provides for the adoption
of doctrinal resolutions and statements; and

WuereEas, Bylaw 1.09 b provides for the adoption of doctrinal
resolutions “for the information, counsel, and guidance of the
membership” of the Synod; and

WuereEAS, Bylaw 1.09 c provides for the adoption of doctrinal
statements to “set forth in greater detail the position of the Synod,
especially in controverted matters”; and

Wuereas, Both doctrinal resolutions and doctrinal statements
may be adopted by a simple majority of the vote of the delegates to
a convention of the Synod, though doctrinal statements (but not
doctrinal resolutions) must be submitted to the congregations of the
Synod for ratification (Bylaw 1.09 c 5); and

Wuereas, The provision in the Bylaws that the Synod may
amend (1.09 c 8) or repeal (1.09 c 9) such doctrinal statements in-
dicates by its very existence that in spite of an intention to conform
to the Scriptures and the Confessions, such statements as well as
resolutions of a convention may go beyond and be out of harmony
with the confessional basis of the Synod; and

WHEREAS, Bylaw 1.09 c 7 requires that such doctrinal state-
ments are to be “honored and upheld”; and

Wrereas, Bylaw 2.39 c calls upon members of the Synod to
“honor and uphold resolutions of the Synod.” and as the context
clearly indicates this is a reference to doctrinal resolutions; and

WHEREAS, Bylaw 2.39 c also makes provision for “revision or
recision” of such doctrinal resolutions; and

Wuereas, The Bylaw provision that the Synod in convention
may amend or repeal such doctrinal statements or resolutions indi-
cates by its very existence that such statements or resolutions may
potentially go beyond or be out of harmony with the confessional
basis of the Synod; and

WuerEas, 1971 Res. 2-12, resolved “that the Synod understand
Article II of its Constitution as permitting, and at times even re-
quiring the formulation and adoption of doctrinal statements” and
further “that the Synod reaffirm its position . . . that such statements
... pursuant to Article II of the Synod’s Constitution [are] binding
on all members,” thereby effectively elevating doctrinal statements
and doctrinal resolutions to equality with the confessional basis of
the Synod; and

WrereaS, 197! Res. 2-12 interpreted the phrase “to honor and
uphold” to mean “‘to abide by, act and teach in accordance with”;
and

WuerEas, This interpretation has been incorporated into Bylaw
1.09 c 7; and

WHEREAS, The Synod in 1962, in repealing 1959 Res. 9, ac-
knowledged that a resolution which declares every synodically
adopted doctrinal statement (past and future) binding upon its
members is unconstitutional since theoretically, at least, such a res-
olution might bind its members to doctrines taught neither by the
Scriptures nor by the Confessions and would in effect amend Arti-
cle II of the Constitution by extending the confessional basis be-
yond the Bible and the Symbols (1962 Res. 6-01); therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod reaffirm the pertinent portions of Res.
6.01 of the 1962 convention; and be it further

Resolved, That the Synod rescind Res. 2-21 of the 1971 con-
vention; and be it further

Resolved, That the interpretation of “honor and uphold” as “to
abide by, act, and teach in accordance with” be deleted from Bylaw
1.09 c 7); and be it further

Resolved, That no resolution of the Synod can supersede the
clear provision of Art. II of the Constitution that the Scriptures of
the Old and New Testaments are the only rule and norm of faith
and practice; and be it further

Resolved, That Bylaw 1.09 c 7 be revised to read: Such adopted
and ratified doctrinal statements shail be regarded as the position of
the Synod in convention and shall be “accepted and used as helpful
expositions and explanations” (FC SD 10); and be it finally

Resolved, That any doctrinal resolutions adopted at conventions
of the Synod be regarded also as “helpful expositions and explana-
tion which are for the information, counsel, and guidance of the
Synod’s membership.”

2001 Convention Workbook