LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 6

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

6 SYNODICAL REPORTS

country in which we live, continues to cause disagreement and
disharmony in our Synod. In The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod, this is nothing new. These questions have plagued the
Synod for years.

As indicated in a number of my communications to the Synod,
the synodical President who faced the conflict in the LCMS in the
1970s, Dr. J. A. O. Preus, said in his report to the 1981 convention
of the Synod:

We also have a whole series of overtures dealing in one way or an-

other with the subject of interchurch relations and unionism and sepa- ~

ratism. I have been in the ministry for over 35 years and have been in-
volved in discussions of unionism and related matters for all of these
years. I have hoped that during my years in office some greater clarity
could be developed among us as to what really is unionism and what
must be dealt with in a disciplinary way, as over against things that
might appear to some to be a compromise of the Word of God but to
others are not such at all and no intent at compromise is intended. |
hope that the Synod will try to develop rubrics and guidelines for a
church of 3 million members in the 1980s and 1990s, rather than al-
ways relying on definitions which are a century old, which deal basi-
cally with a European situation and are not particularly helpful for our
modern time. I believe our fathers were eminently sincere and totally
correct in what they did, but I think we have to rethink our own position
on these matters so as to make their position our own or so as to make
their position something that is workable and feasible and acceptable in
our own midst. We can all agree that we want to avoid a total sepa-
ratism on the one hand and a wild irresponsible ecumenism on the
other. The difficulty is to find a middle path which will avoid both of
these extremes and which can work in all situations in our church. (Dr.

Jacob A. O. Preus, President’s Address, 1981 LCMS Convention Pro-

ceedings, pp. 65-66)

Frankly, my brothers and sisters in Christ, I couldn’t agree
more. Those words could very well be my own, except that I have
been in the ministry for only 34 years, not 35. The matters of inter-
church relations, unionism, separatism, syncretism, participating in
events or services involving non-LCMS participants, and so forth,
cry out for biblically based resolution among us. While numerous
examples of such difficult questions might be cited, none is more
widely known among us than the event at Yankee Stadium on Sept.
23, 2001.

Participation of an LCMS District President at this event, which
followed the terrorism of Sept. 11, 2001, surfaced a deep-seated
difference of perspective and belief regarding the circumstances
under which pastors of our Synod may legitimately and appropri-
ately participate in what have been called “civic events” or “civil
religious events” or simply “religious events.” The filing of formal
charges against the District President, who participated in the event
after consultation with his ecclesiastical supervisor (the synodical
President), was followed by a decision of the synodical Vice-Pres-
idents to declare the President to have a conflict of interest and to
remand the case to one of the Vice-Presidents, who decided to sus-
pend the District President from the clergy roster of the Synod.
Subsequently, a Dispute Resolution Panel decided to overturn the
suspension, resulting in the District President’s remaining on the
clergy roster of the Synod and being restored to his office as Dis-
trict President. Sadly and regrettably, the relationship between the
Vice-President and his employer was ended in connection with his
involvement in this case, which has occupied more time and re-
sources that anyone can count or even imagine. Officially, the case
is concluded, in accord with pertinent Bylaw provisions. My pas-
toral letters and extensive reports to the Synod on this matter are
available on the Synod’s Web site at www.Icms.org/president. For
your convenience, my most recent letter to the Synod regarding this
matter is included as an Appendix to this report.

In order to assist the Synod, particularly its pastors, in making
decisions about the circumstances under which participation in
cases that call for the exercise of godly discretion might properly
occur, shortly after the Yankee Stadium controversy arose I asked
the Commission on Theology and Church Relations to prepare

2004 Convention Workbook

guidelines for participation in civic events. This CTCR study was
not finalized in time for printing in this Convention Workbook, but
is due to be completed in April and should appear in an early edi-
tion of ““Today’s Business.” I encourage you to read it carefully and
pray it will be a blessing to the Synod.

It would be incomplete for me not to share with the delegates to
this convention that, in the unfolding of the case cited above, for-
mal charges were brought against me specifically, asking that I be
removed from the clergy roster of The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod. These charges were not unlike those brought against the
District President who participated in the Yankee Stadium event.
In response to questions about the meaning of a synodical Bylaw
adopted in 1998, but never used prior to the Yankee Stadium case,
the Commission on Constitutional Matters of the Synod, in an of-
ficial opinion, determined that the President of the Synod could be
removed from the Synod only by the Synod itself in convention.
Indeed, overtures have been submitted to this convention asking
for my removal from the roster of the Synod and, accordingly, from
the office of President of the Synod.

My position on this issue remains the same as it has been since
the time of the decisions I made regarding events following Sept.
11, 2001, specifically the Yankee Stadium case. My decisions in
life and in office are based on my acceptance of the Holy Scrip-
tures as “the written Word of God and the only rule and norm of
faith and of practice” and the Lutheran Confessions as “‘a true and
unadulterated statement and exposition of the Word of God”
(LCMS Constitution, Art. II). It is my privilege, duty, and respon-
sibility to honor and uphold the positions of the Synod as articu-
lated in the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the LCMS.
Those very important documents are subject to differing interpre-
tation, as has been obvious throughout this case and much of the
history of our beloved Synod. I believe I have correctly interpreted
and properly upheld these very important covenants of love in this
and every case in which the office of the President has been called
upon to provide “evangelical supervision, counsel, and care for pas-
tors, teachers, and other professional church workers of the Synod
in the performance of their official duties” and “protection for con-
gregations, pastors, teachers, and other church workers in the per-
formance of their official duties and the maintenance of their
rights” (LCMS Constitution, Art. II).

At the same time, I am acutely aware that I am ultimately ac-
countable, not only to Almighty God but also to the convention of
the Synod, for all my decisions and actions. Accordingly, if the
LCMS, in convention assembled in 2004, should determine that the
decisions I made in the Yankee Stadium case, based on my inter-
pretation of resolutions adopted by the convention assembled in
2001, are not in keeping with the confession of our church and our
collective understanding of Holy Scripture’s teaching regarding
such matters, I will, of course, abide by that determination. The
President of the Synod is accountable to the convention of the
Synod.

In the meantime, as mentioned earlier in this report, I appointed
a Blue Ribbon Task Force on Ecclesiastical Supervision and Dis-
pute Resolution to review and recommend to the Synod amend-
ments to the Bylaws that would provide proper evangelical super-
vision, counsel, care, protection, and maintenance of the rights of
congregations, pastors, teachers, and other professional church
workers of the Synod in the performance of their official duties
(LCMS Constitution, Art. Ill). Specifically, the task force has re-
viewed the Bylaws regarding restricting, suspending, and expelling
congregations or individuals from membership in the Synod, By-
laws that have caused considerable confusion and discord in the
Synod. The task force recommends proper procedure for the ac-
countability of District Presidents and the President of the Synod
between conventions and for amending the Bylaws regarding dis-