Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2004 · 62nd Convention, St. Louis › Page 405

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 405

front matter 1 front matter 2 front matter 3 front matter 4 front matter 5 front matter 6 front matter 7 front matter 8 front matter 9 front matter 10 front matter 11 front matter 12 front matter 13 front matter 14 front matter 15 front matter 16 front matter 17 Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Page 200 Page 201 Page 202 Page 203 Page 204 Page 205 Page 206 Page 207 Page 208 Page 209 Page 210 Page 211 Page 212 Page 213 Page 214 Page 215 Page 216 Page 217 Page 218 Page 219 Page 220 Page 221 Page 222 Page 223 Page 224 Page 225 Page 226 Page 227 Page 228 Page 229 Page 230 Page 231 Page 232 Page 233 Page 234 Page 235 Page 236 Page 237 Page 238 Page 239 Page 240 Page 241 Page 242 Page 243 Page 244 Page 245 Page 246 Page 247 Page 248 Page 250 Page 251 Page 252 Page 253 Page 254 Page 255 Page 256 Page 257 Page 258 Page 259 Page 260 Page 261 Page 262 Page 263 Page 264 Page 265 Page 266 Page 267 Page 268 Page 269 Page 270 Page 271 Page 272 Page 273 Page 274 Page 275 Page 276 Page 277 Page 278 Page 279 Page 280 Page 281 Page 282 Page 283 Page 284 Page 285 Page 286 Page 287 Page 288 Page 289 Page 290 Page 291 Page 292 Page 293 Page 294 Page 295 Page 296 Page 297 Page 298 Page 299 Page 300 Page 301 Page 302 Page 303 Page 304 Page 305 Page 306 Page 307 Page 308 Page 309 Page 310 Page 311 Page 312 Page 313 Page 314 Page 316 Page 317 Page 318 Page 319 Page 320 Page 321 Page 322 Page 323 Page 324 Page 325 Page 326 Page 327 Page 328 Page 329 Page 330 Page 331 Page 332 Page 333 Page 334 Page 335 Page 336 Page 337 Page 338 Page 339 Page 340 Page 341 Page 342 Page 343 Page 344 Page 345 Page 346 Page 347 Page 348 Page 349 Page 350 Page 351 Page 352 Page 353 Page 354 Page 355 Page 356 Page 357 Page 358 Page 359 Page 360 Page 361 Page 362 Page 363 Page 364 Page 365 Page 366 Page 367 Page 368 Page 369 Page 370 Page 371 Page 372 Page 373 Page 374 Page 375 Page 376 Page 377 Page 378 Page 379 Page 380 Page 381 Page 382 Page 383 Page 384 Page 385 Page 386 Page 387 Page 388 Page 389 Page 390 Page 391 Page 392 Page 393 Page 394 Page 395 Page 396 Page 397 Page 398 Page 399 Page 400 Page 401 Page 402 Page 403 Page 404 Page 405 Page 406 Page 407 Page 408 Page 409 Page 410 Page 411 Page 412 Page 413 Page 414 Page 415 Page 416 Page 417 Page 418 Page 419 Page 420 Page 421 Page 422 Page 423 Page 424 Page 425 Page 426 Page 427 Page 428 Page 429 Page 430 Page 431 Page 432 Page 433 Page 434 Page 435 Page 436 Page 437 Page 438 Page 439 Page 440 Page 441 Page 442 Page 443 Page 444 Page 445 Page 446 Page 447 Page 448 Page 449 Page 450 Page 451 Page 452 Page 453 Page 454 Page 455 Page 456 Page 457 Page 458 Page 459 Page 460 Page 461 Page 462 Page 463 Page 464 Page 465 Page 466 Page 467 Page 468 Page 469 Page 470 Page 471 Page 472 Page 473

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

THEOLOGICAL DOCUMENTS—COMMISSION ON THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 405

confession. So important is this distinction, that The Lutheran Un-
derstanding of Church Fellowship calls special attention to it as
one of three “basic assumptions” in the Introduction of this docu-
ment: “The church’s internal unity [“the fellowship of all believ-
ers”], Known only to God (Eph. 1:4), is expressed by an external
or outward fellowship based on Confession” (5). The Commission
expands on this assumption by stating:
While the church’s internal unity is perfect and known only to God
(Eph. 1:4), the limits of external fellowship are determined by whether
the Gospel is preached purely and the sacraments are administered ac-
cording to Christ’s institution. The Gospel and the sacraments are in
themselves always pure. In this way they create and preserve the church
in her hidden unity throughout the world. Yet, when church bodies
make public confession of the Gospel and the sacraments, tragically
some obscure or explicitly contradict the teaching of the Gospel and the
proper administration of the sacraments. For this reason the limits or
boundaries of the external fellowship are creeds and confessions.
Churches in altar and pulpit fellowship share the same confession, in-
cluding the rejection of errors that contradict this confession. Where
churches cannot agree on a common confession, the basis for church
fellowship does not exist. (5)

The fundamental distinction set forth in the above-mentioned as-
sumption is obscured by statements in “That They May Be One.” One
might cite, for example, declaration one (1) of the document (noted
above) which states that fellowship (altar and pulpit fellowship) with
heterodox church bodies “destroys fellowship with Christ [presumably,
membership in the una sancta ecclesia], Who insists that we teach all
[emphasis original] things that He has commanded us.” This statement
is misleading and confusing, for it suggests, without qualification, that

church fellowship with heterodox churches destroys the unity of the:

church, the body of Christ (unitas; cf. A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal
Position of the Missouri Synod, paragraphs 26-29). While agreement
in doctrine establishes the limits and boundaries of external fellowship
(church fellowship), the church’s internal and perfect unity (hidden to
us but known to God) is preserved in spite of those who err concerning
some aspect of the teaching of the Gospel and the correct administration
of the sacraments.

2. Definition of Civic Events.

Declaration seven (7) admits “that civic events often present an
opportunity to proclaim the Gospel, and that Christians can pub-
licly offer prayers to the Triune God at such events.” Civic events,
the declaration continues, are to be distinguished from “Interfaith
prayer services,” which “‘by definition, cannot be considered [such]
civic events, but must be considered unionistic and syncretistic ser-
vices.” Declaration 8 then utilizes a definition of a worship “ser-
vice” as that which contains elements “used by a regularly desig-
nated worship leader of the church” and concludes in a “rejection,”
“We reject the teaching that events of the type described here can
be considered civic events.” Declaration 9 then begins by affirming
the following: “We are to make a clear confession of the Gospel at
every opportunity presented to us. Further, one can pray in the pres-
ence of those who are non-Christian, if all the prayers are offered
only to the one true God, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and only

by those confessing faith in the Triune God. In this regard we do

not speak of prayer services, as elsewhere described, but strictly of
prayer itself.”

We appreciate the attempt here to say what a “civic event” is
not, but it is not at all clear how the document, exactly, defines a
“civic event.” Evidently, it is not an event where proclamation of
the Gospel and prayers in the presence of non-Christians are nec-
essarily absent, though one reading of Declaration 9 might suggest
that all prayers offered must be Trinitarian and spoken only by
those confessing faith in the Triune God. If this is the case, does
the document then mean to say that civic events are actually occa-
sions at which prayers are spoken only by Christians?

Whatever the document means in its references to “civic
events,” it is certain that further reflection and discussion needs to
be given to this topic in the Synod. The Commission itself has on

ry

its agenda an assignment to provide further clarity and guidelines
on this matter.

3. The Question of Joint Prayer.

Related to the previous point is the question of joint prayer. The
“rejection” paragraph of Declaration 9 condemns “‘the teaching that
those who confess the name of Christ can join in prayer with those
who are part of non-Christian faiths.” The Commission whole-
heartedly agrees that such teaching is contrary to the scriptural and
confessional principles of fellowship. Christians cannot pray with
non-Christians without compromising their witness to the biblical
faith.

But this leaves unanswered the question as to whether “prayers”
offered by both Christians and non-Christians at public events must
necessarily be regarded, and in all circumstances, as joint prayers
(leaders of a public event could make clear, for example, that they
are not to be regarded as such).

4. Function of the “Condemnations” and/or “Rejections.”

“That They May Be One,” as we have noted earlier, begins by
observing that “some [in our Synod] have contended that this [Yan-
kee Stadium event] was merely a civic event,” while “others have
maintained that the event’s agenda calls into question this con-
tention.” The document presents its strong argument that partici-
pation in the Yankee Stadium event was syncretistic. However, the
document repeatedly “condemns” the view opposing its own in
such a way as to imply that those who hold to this opposing view
also are guilty of positions that few if any in our Synod have ac-
cepted or would ever accept.

Charitably, we surely may assume, not every person who re-
gards the Yankee Stadium event as a civic affair would accept
views such as the following singled out in the condemnations: “that
differences in doctrine are trivial” [2]; “differences of doctrine are
in someway a blessing from God rather than a curse of Satan” [5];
“that one can ... pray with non-Christians” [6]; “that every prayer
which uses the name ‘Jesus’ is automatically prayed to the Triune
God and thereby an expression of the Gospel” [6]; that we may
“present the Gospel as one option among many” [9]; “that prayers
are made worthy because of human actions” [10];”that charity and
license are the same thing” [13].

A “if the shoe fits, wear it” response will not be sufficient here,
when fellow-members of the Synod are being publicly targeted for
condemnation and rejection.

5. Scriptural and Confessional Argumentation.

“That They May Be One” promises to be “‘a scriptural and con-
fessional statement concerning church fellowship and public
prayer,” and in reference to Art. VI of the Synod’s Constitution de-
clares, “God’s Word is clear on this issue” {unionism and syn-
cretism].

However, the document presents little by way of specific and
sustained argumentation based on scriptural and confessional texts.
There is, in fact, a paucity of scriptural texts cited that actually deal
with the subject of church fellowship and public prayer (see The
Lutheran Understanding of Church Fellowship, esp. pp. 6-9, for
more extended discussion of pertinent texts). Moreover, aside from
three initial references in paragraph one to the Epitome of the For-
mula of Concord, the Small Catechism, and the Augsburg Confes-
sion (and one later citation from the Athanasian Creed), no focused
discussion of confessional principles regarding church fellowship
and public prayer is given.

Conclusion

The Commission shares the conviction, expressed also by “That
They May Be One,” that God-pleasing concord in the church,
under His guidance and blessing, is achieved through concerted and

2004 Convention Workbook