LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 73

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

SYNODICAL REPORTS 73

Response to Atlantic District Questions on “Doctrinal Subscription”

The CTCR notes that a number of the issues raised in the ques-
tions submitted by the Atlantic District have been addressed by the
Synod in its synodical Handbook (e.g., Bylaw 1.09, “Doctrinal
Resolutions and Statements”) and in previous resolutions of
the Synod. Especially significant in this connection are 1971
Res. 2-21 “To Uphold Synodical Doctrinal Resolutions” and 1971
Res. 5-24 “To Define Status of Synodically Adopted Doctrinal
Statements.” Copies of these resolutions are attached and are com-
mended to the Atlantic District for review and reflection on various
aspects of the questions they have raised.

Question 1: “How are we to understand the force of Doctrinal
Statements and Doctrinal Resolutions in lieu [sic] of our subscrip-
tion to the Holy Scriptures and the Lutheran Symbols (Confes-
sions)?

Response: As 1971 Res. 2-21 states, “The Synod is irrevocably
committed to the Sola Scriptura principle.” At the same time, “The
Synod maintains that it is not a violation of the Sola Scriptura prin-
ciple when it adopts doctrinal resolutions, for the Synod in such
resolutions does not presume to establish doctrine, but intends only
to confess doctrines taught by the Scriptures.” Members of the
Synod commit themselves, therefore, “by the grace and mercy of
God” (1971 Res. 2-21), to “honor and uphold” the Synod’s doctri-
nal resolutions and statements unless and until it is shown that they
are in violation of Holy Scripture and/or the Lutheran Confessions.

Question 2: ‘What does it mean to ‘honor and uphold’?”

Response: To “honor and uphold” Synod’s doctrinal statements
and resolutions “means not merely to examine and study them, but
to support, act, and teach in accordance with them until they have
been shown to be contrary to God’s Word” (1971 Res. 2-21).

Question 3: “What are Synod’s Doctrinal Statements? Please
list. What are Synod’s Doctrinal Resolutions? Please list. What is
the difference?”

Response: The request for a “listing” of the Synod’s doctrinal
statements and resolutions is more properly addressed to the Sec-
retary of the Synod. Questions regarding the difference between
doctrinal statements and doctrinal resolutions are most properly an-
swered by the Commission on Constitutional Matters (cf., however,
the response to question four below, as well as Bylaw 1.09 and the
attached resolutions).

Question 4: “If Doctrinal Resolutions can be passed by a 51%
majority of delegates at a Synodical Convention while passing a
Doctrinal Statement requires a more stringent procedure (includ-
ing ratification of 2/3 of member congregations), how can Doctri-
nal Statements and Doctrinal Resolutions be considered to have the
same force?”

Response: 1971 Res. 5-24 affirms the distinction between doc-
trinal resolutions and doctrinal statements, characterizing the latter
as “more formal and comprehensive statements of belief.” The
purpose of both, however, is to “clearly set forth the teachings of
the Holy Scriptures and apply them to issues of our day” (1971
Res. 5-24). Questions about the processes agreed to in the Synod
for adopting and/or ratifying doctrinal resolutions and statements
are more properly answered by the Secretary of the Synod or the
Commission on Constitutional Matters.

Adopted September 18, 2002

2. Request from Dispute Resolution Panel

In a letter dated December 20, 2002, the Secretary of the Synod
informed the CTCR that a Dispute Resolution Panel had submit-
ted two questions to the CTCR “in behalf of a party to a dispute.”
At its February 2003 meeting the Commission adopted the follow-
ing response to the two questions:

Response to Questions from Dispute Resolution Panel

Question: Would offering a prayer by an LCMS pastor in a
“civic event” in which prayers would also be offered by represen-
tatives of non-Christian religions be in and of itself a violation of
the paragraph under “Section V point B. Cases of Discretion” in
the CTCR document “The Lutheran Understanding of Church Fel-
lowship,” a document adopted by the 2001 Convention of the
Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod “for continued use and guid-
ance?”

Answer: No. Section V, B. does not explicitly address the issue
of “offering a prayer by an LCMS pastor in a ‘civic event’ in which
prayers would also be offered by representatives of non-Christian
religions.” The CTCR is presently considering assignments with
respect to this issue, including the formulation of guidelines for
participation in civic events and the definition of “civic event.”

Question: What are the implications of the concluding two sen-
tences — “Pastors may have honest differences of opinion about
whether or to what extent it is appropriate or helpful to participate
in these or similar civic events. In these cases charity must prevail.”
— for making decisions regarding participation in the “civic events”
described in the paragraph?

Answer: The decisions of pastors regarding the offering of
prayers, speaking and reading scripture in events outside of their own
and other LCMS congregations are to be made on the basis of the
Synod’s agreed upon application of the scriptural principles of fel-
lowship. It is virtually impossible to anticipate all such occasions or to
give specific answers to cover every type of situation which may
arise. Invitations to participate in these events can be evaluated only
on a case-by-case basis and may evoke different responses from dif-
ferent pastors equally committed to LCMS fellowship principles. In
these’situations, honest disagreement regarding participation in cer-
tain events may arise. In such cases pastors will respect and honor in
Christian love decisions regarding participation which differ from
their own, even while they carry on conversations with the brother(s)
with whom they have the disagreement.

Adopted February 18, 2003

At its February 2003 meeting the Commission also received mi-
nority opinions to the above CTCR response, one signed by Dr.
Kurt Marquart and another by Pastor Walter Lehenbauer and Mr.
Paul Nus. These minority opinions are included in Appendix II of
the Workbook and are available online at www.Icms.org/ctcr/.

3. Lay Teachers of Theology

In June 1993, the Board of Directors of the BHE/CUS asked the
Commission’s “assistance in studying and responding to the fol-
lowing questions: (1) What does Scripture and the Lutheran Con-
fessions say re: a layperson functioning as a teacher of theology
(theological studies/education) in a class (course of study) with stu-
dents who are preparing for full-time work (ministry) within the
LCMS? (2) Within the same context as the above question, if a
layperson can function as a teacher of theology, does it make any
difference whether that person is male or female?” At its February
2003 meeting the Commission adopted the following response to
the BOD of the BHE/CUS:

Response to Questions from BHE/CUS
on
Lay Teachers of Theology

Question: What do Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions say
re a layperson functioning as a teacher of theology (theological
studies/education) in a class (course of study) with students who
are preparing for full-time work (ministry) with the LCMS?

Response: The response to this question depends on how the
term “teacher of theology” is understood.

The Scriptures use the term “teacher” to refer to a man who
holds the office of the public ministry (pastoral office). In 1 Timo-

2004 Convention Workbook