LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 404

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

404
“That They May Be One”

A Response of the Commission on Theology
and Church Relations

Introduction

In a letter dated June 27, 2002, the Secretary of the Council of
Presidents forwarded to the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations the following request from the Council, adopted at its
April 23, 2002, meeting: “That the CTCR study the document
“That They May Be One,” and make an evaluation as to whether or
not the document ‘adequately and correctly gives expression to the
doctrinal position of the Synod.’” The Council of Presidents in-
formed the authors and distributors of “That They May Be One”
of its decision to forward its request to the CTCR by stating the
following:

In the conclusion of your document you ask that the Council of
Presidents—which includes the President of Synod and the Vice-Presi-
dents—examine your document. Since the group within the Synod that
is charged with the task of making such evaluations and examinations is
the Commission on Theology and Church Relations, we therefore have
submitted “That They May be One” to the Commission for an evalua-
tion to determine whether it adequately and correctly gives expression
to the doctrinal position of the Synod.

The CTCR placed this request of the Council on its agenda at its
September 2002 meeting.

In the evaluation that follows the Commission has focused on
whether the statement ‘‘adequately and correctly” has reflected the
doctrinal position of the Synod. The Commission has not presumed
to pass judgment on the appropriateness of participation in the
event under discussion in “That They May Be One.”

This response to “That They May Be One” includes reference to
the February 2000 study material The Lutheran Understanding of
Church Fellowship and to The Lutheran Understanding of Church
Fellowship: A Report on Synodical Discussions, two documents
prepared by the Office of the President and the Commission on
Theology and Church Relations with appropriate scriptural and
confessional documentation (for detailed discussion of points at
issue, see these and other pertinent documents at www.Icms.org/
Ctcr).

Affirmation

The Commission appreciates the desire of the drafters and sign-
ers of “That They May Be One” to contribute to the synodical dis-
cussion of controverted matters related to the Yankee Stadium
event, and to promote clarity of understanding and concord in the
Synod (Preface). The document begins with pastoral sensitivity to
the “extraordinary circumstances” presenting “enormous chal-
lenges” to our nation in these “trying times,” pledging its support
for efforts to bring “comfort, hope and material assistance to the
survivors” of the 9-11 atrocities. It introduces its declarations with
the helpful observation that while the purpose of the Yankee Sta-
dium event “was to generate and demonstrate unity in our nation
and to secure support from the general population for the survivors
of these horrors,” the means to these ‘worthy goals” have raised
questions in our Synod.

In an attempt to bring clarity to these questions the document
presents fourteen statements, with accompanying condemnations
and/or rejections. The Commission commends the document for its
many fine statements regarding the faithful proclamation of the
Gospel, purity of doctrine and the necessity of agreement in all the
articles of faith for external unity in the church. We note, for ex-
ample, the following:

« “that the Triune God gives church fellowship to His church for
her good and for the good of the world,” and that “the teaching
that differences in doctrine are trivial” must be rejected [2].

2004 Convention Workbook

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS

« that “those who offer prayers outside the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are ‘praying to a god that cannot save’ (Isaiah 45:20),” and
that the teaching “that prayers designated to ‘a god’ or ‘any god’
are valid, or that prayers directed to a god other than the Triune
God are valid ...” must be rejected [3].

e “that on certain occasions Christians may pray with persons of a
heterodox confession without injury to their conscience and with-
out compromising the purity of the Gospel. Such prayers must be
directed to the One True God and must not give the impression
that differences in doctrine which exist are insignificant. Further-
more, no limits may be placed on one’s ability to speak the Word
of God” [6].

* “that worthiness to approach God in prayer consists only in the
propitiatory sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, and that there is
nothing inherent in us which makes us worthy to approach God”
{10].

* “that it is unloving and uncharitable to hide or obscure differences
in doctrine for the sake of outward unity” [13].

e “that there are matters of adiaphora for which there can be honest
differences of opinion” and that “church fellowship is not one of
them” [6].

Evaluation

Although “That They May Be One” intends to bring clarity to
the subject of “Church Fellowship and Public Prayer” [Title], the
document itself, in the Commission’s view, suffers from a lack of
clarity at certain critical points. Its adequacy as a lucid and faithful
presentation of the Synod’s position regarding church fellowship
and public prayer may be questioned in five areas: (1) The Mean-
ing of “Church Fellowship”; (2) Definition of “Civic Events”; (3)
The Question of “Joint” Worship; (4) Function of the “Condemna-
tions” and/or “Rejections”; and (5) Scriptural and Confessional Ar-
gumentation. Except where noted otherwise below, italics are for
the sake of emphasis.

1. The Meaning of “Church Fellowship.”

The statement’s first declaration begins by saying that “church
fellowship consists in ‘unity with [one another] in teaching and all
the articles of faith and in the proper use of the holy sacraments
(Epitome X, paragraph 7).” The rejection that accompanies this
first declaration speaks of “fellowship with heterodox church bod-
ies” as an action that “destroys fellowship with Christ, Who insists
that we teach all {emphasis origina]] things He has commanded
us.” The second declaration affirms that “the Triune God gives
church fellowship to His church” and points to John 17:17, 21 and
its reference to the unity of the church in analogy to the unity of
the Father and Son as proof for this assertion concerning “church
fellowship.” The next sentence then declares that the Gospel of
Christ creates true church fellowship.” This true church fellowship
is distinguished from “fellowship created solely on the basis of out-
ward structures, without unity in faith given by God ... a human
invention.” The third declaration begins with a reference to “all
church fellowship” as proceeding from the one true God.

On the basis of these and other references to the term “fellow-
ship” in the declarations, it is difficult to know precisely how the
document is using the term “church fellowship.” Sometimes the
term seems to refer to fellowship with Christ in the one Holy Chris-
tian Church (“true church fellowship”’?), and other times to fellow-
ship in the sense of external unity in the church based on agree-
ment in confession (“outward unity in the church’’?). In still other
instances, it is hard to know exactly what referent the authors have
in mind.

In matters so important among us, it is necessary in the Com-
mission’s judgment that clear distinctions be maintained on the
basis of scriptural and confessional texts. Particularly crucial is the
distinction between the spiritual fellowship that all Christians have
in the body of Christ, and external unity based on agreement in