LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 350

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

350 OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

trinal Principles, issued by the President of the Synod in consulta-
tion with the Vice-Presidents and evaluated and approved by the
Commission on Theology and Church Relations, has in recent
times been given doctrinal statement status. None of them, includ-
ing the study and response in question which was commended to
the Synod “for continued use and guidance” (Res. 3-07A of the
2001 convention), has been submitted to the process (Bylaw 1.09 c)
whereby it has become a doctrinal statement of the Synod.

1973 Resolution 3-01, stated that A Statement of Scriptural and
Confessional Principles, issued by the President of the Synod in
consultation with the Vice-Presidents of the Synod and affirmed
by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations, presents
what the Synod throughout its history has taught and is therefore
“neither a new standard of orthodoxy nor a document ‘based on
private writings, but on such books as have been composed, ap-
proved, and received in the name of the churches which pledge
themselves to one doctrine and religion’” (FC, SD, Comp. Sum-
mary, paragraph 2). It declared A Statement to be a “more formal
and comprehensive statement of belief’ in the sense of Resolution
5-24 of the 1971 convention and further declared that A Statement
hold the status that that resolution described:

Resolved, That the Synod reaffirm the desirability of the formulation
of doctrinal statements which clearly set forth the teachings of the Holy
Scriptures and apply them to issues of our day; and be it further

Resolved, That the Synod clearly state that such doctrinal formula-
tions are subordinate to the Lutheran Confessions; and be it further
Resolved, That the Synod distinguish between resolutions concern-
ing doctrine formulated and adopted at a convention and more formal
statements of belief which are produced by officially authorized groups,
and which are then presented to congregations and clergy of the Synod
for study and discussion, and which are subsequently adopted by a syn-
odical convention; and be it further
Resolved, That the Synod reaffirm the resolutions of recent conven-
tions that the Synod “honor and uphold the synodically adopted state-
ments as valid interpretations of Christian doctrine” (1969 Proceedings,
p. 91); and be it finally
Resolved, That in the case of the aforementioned more formal and
comprehensive statements of belief that the Synod declare—
1) its position that these statements, together with all other formula-
tions of doctrine, derive their authority from the Word of God
which they set forth from the Holy Scriptures;

2) its insistence that the ministry of the church regard these formu-
lations with special seriousness and that those who disagree with
these formulations in part or in whole be held to present their ob-
jections to them formally to those officials whom the Synod has
given the immediate supervision of their doctrine;

3) its conviction that as a result of joint study of the Word of God
the Holy Spint will lead the Synod into all truth, that possible er-
Tors in the aforementioned statements will be discovered and cor-
rected, that instances of failure to submil to the clear leaching of
the Holy Scripture will be evangelically dealt with on an individ-
ual pastoral basis, and that the Synod can speak with a voice that
is Scriptural, Gospel oriented, truly Lutheran, and that we will
continue to “walk together” as a true Synod.

1975 Resolution 3-05, reaffirming that A Statement [of Scrip-
tural and Confessional Principles] is in accord with the Scriptures
and the Lutheran Confessions and contains nothing contrary to
them, offers additional insight into the use of Commission on The-
ology and Church Relations statements in its first resolve: “That
the Synod commend to its members for reference and guidance the
report titled ‘Guiding Principles for the Use of A Statement of
Scriptural and Confessional Principles with Special Reference
to the Expression of Dissent’ (1975 CW, pp. 468-70, the closing
sentences of which read:

A Statement is not to be used mechanically or legalistically to disci-
pline members of the Synod, but it is to be honored, upheld, and used
fraternally and evangelically throughout the Synod in an effort to assist
the Synod in remaining faithful to its confessional position. Used in this
way, A Statement may, with the blessing of God’s Holy Spirit, serve
the ‘conservation and promotion of the unity of the true faith’ (Consti-
tution, Article III) and aid the Synod in the faithful proclamation of the
Gospel of Jesus Christ to all the world.”

2004 Convention Workbook

After also commending the document titled “Report on Dissent”
to the members of the Synod “for reference and guidance” and in-
structing the Commission on Theology and Church Relations to
make several revisions to A Statement, the Synod not only reaf-
firmed that “A Statement is in accord with the Scriptures and the
Lutheran Confessions, and contains nothing contrary to them, and
is in accord with the doctrinal position of The Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod as it has been taught historically and expressed in
the official doctrinal statements of the Synod,” but it also adopted
the following opinion of the Commission on Constitutional Mat-
ters:

Since the Synod has the right to adopt doctrinal resolutions, it also
had the right to adopt Resolution 3-01 [of the 1973 convention].

In Resolution 3-01 the Synod approved a document known as A
Statement. That document therefore comes under the provision of New
Orleans Resolution 2-12: “That the Synod reaffirm its position (Reso-
lutions 2-21 and 5-24, Milwaukee Proceedings) that such statements,
insofar as they are in accord with the Scriptures, are, pursuant to Article
II of the Synod’s Constitution, binding upon all its members (cf. also
Article VII.”

However, the Synod cannot make A Statement binding upon its
members in the same sense in which the Scripture is binding. Nor can it
ask its members to bind themselves to A Statement in the same manner
in which they freely bind themselves to the Lutheran Confessions.

Resolution 3-01 does not broaden the confessional base of the
Synod. It was not offered as a constitutional amendment. It is to be rec-
ognized as a properly adopted resolution. In it the Synod determined
that A Statement defines the corporate position of the Synod and sets
forth the public teaching of the Synod.

The adoption of Resolution 3-01 by the Synod does not bind the in-
dividual conscience any more than any other human document can; only
Scripture should bind the conscience. As Luther stated before the Diet
of Worms:

“Unless I am convinced by the testimonies of the Holy Scriptures or
evident reason (for I believe neither in the Pope nor Councils alone,
since it has been established that they have often erred and contradicted
themselves), I am bound by the Scriptures adduced by me, and my con-
science has been taken captive by the Word of God, and I am neither
able nor willing to recant, since it is neither safe nor right to act against
conscience. God help me. Amen.”

To the person troubled in his conscience, the Synod says:

“If a member cannot for conscience sake accept a doctrinal resolu-
tion of the Synod, he has the obligation and opportunity through mutu-
ally approved procedure to challenge such a resolution with a view of
effecting the changes he deems necessary. Failing in that, he is com-
pletely free by reason of his wholly voluntary association with the
Synod to obey his conscience and disassociate himself from the Synod.
Meanwhile every member of the Synod is held to abide by, act, and
teach in accordance with the Synod’s resolutions” (Milwaukee Resolu-
tion 2-21, 1971 Proceedings, p. 119).

Subscription to A Statement cannot be a requirement for member-

ship in the Synod. However, already at the Cleveland convention in
1962, the Synod resolved “that the Synod beseech all its members by
the mercies of God to honor and uphold the doctrinal content of these
synodically adopted statements” (Cleveland Resolution 3-17, 1962 Pro-
ceedings, p. 106). And “to honor and uphold means not merely to ex-
amine and study them, but lo support, act, and teach in accordance with
them until they have been shown to be contrary to God’s Word.” (Mil-
waukee Resolution 2-21, 1971 Proceedings, p. 119).
In response to the question, therefore, the Commission notes
that Resolution 3-07A did not adopt “The Lutheran Understanding
of Church Fellowship” and its response as a doctrinal statement of
the Synod in the same manner as the Synod has in the past adopted
a number of doctrinal statements, such as A Statement of Scriptural
and Confessional Principles. The resolution in question did, how-
ever, commend the study “The Lutheran Understanding of Church
Fellowship” and its response “for continued use and guidance” to
build unity in the Synod, using similar terminology to that which
has been used to commend numerous other studies of the Commis-
sion on Theology and Church Relations.

Question 11 b: “Does Resolution 3-07A mean that any member

of the Synod who does not abide by, and follow in practice the
CTCR documents referred to in Resolution 3-07A, is in violation of