LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2007, Page 418

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

418

of worship forms and music in use in the Synod. He called particular
attention to Article V1 2 of the LCMS Constitution (renunciation of
unionism and syncretism) as relative to a time when the Synod was
small and community-located, and Article II! 6 & 7 (varieties of re-
sources and practices) as becoming ever more important as the land-
scape of the Synod changes. Discussion followed regarding the refer-
enced constitutional paragraphs.

Thomas Aadland presented a paper on the topic “AALC on Piety vs.
Pietism,” discussing the origins of the concepts of “piety” (the attitude
of faith and its expression in life which lets God be God) and “impiety”
(godlessness, the distinguishing feature of fallen humanity). He ob-
served that the Reformation can be seen as a recovery of the true bibli-
cal meaning of piety—faith and life in relation to the living God, ef-
fected only by God the Holy Spirit who creates. sustains, and deepens
faith through the Gospel and the sacraments. Such piety is directed ver-
tically toward God and horizontally to the neighbor and always bears
fruit. He then applied this biblical view of piety to practice in history
and the church, noting that some AALC congregations have roots in
traditions that date back to 17th century pietism and its tendency to un-
dermine true piety with an emphasis on experience over doctrine, which
in turn leads to other mistaken notions. He assured that such is not the
norm in the AALC, which recognizes the need for the right use of the
means of grace and the application of the Word and the proper distine-
tion between Law and Gospel in its preaching and sou} care. Discus-
sion followed regarding the ease of crossing the lines when it comes to
pietism and its opposite, cheap grace, which holds that no one is per-
fect and forgiveness is always available later on. It was agreed that piety
vs. Pietism is not at issue in the current AALC-LCMS fellowship dis-
cussions.

Darrel Deuel addressed the subject, “AALC on Role of Women in the
Church,” by providing copies of two documents, “The Role of Women
in the AALC” and “The Danvers Statement,” the first citing actions by
conventions of the AALC in November of 1987 and June of 1998 and
the second a statement by the Council on Biblical Manhood and Wom-
anhood adopted by the AALC at its June 1998 convention. He stated
that the AALC uses these materials to affirm that both men and women
are created in the image of God and therefore have a spiritual equality
before God. While neither is superior to the other, equality is not same-
ness, for there is a divine order proclaimed by Scripture with different
functions for men and women. While women have great value and dig-
nity, they are also subordinate to men. Because man is given the posi-
tion of headship, woman is not to have authority over man, and there-
fore the pastoral office is to be held by men. Women are encouraged to
seek and consider God’s call into all other areas of ministry. This is re-
garded as a non-controversial issue in the AALC. Discussion followed
regarding the background of the “Danvers Statement,” the absence of
restrictive policies regarding women serving in congregational offices
(although no AALC congregations are known to have women serving
as elders), and the refusal to ordain women as one of the two primary
reasons (the other being the authority of Scripture) why the AALC has
not received many new congregations into its fellowship from the
ELCA.

Samuel Nafzger provided the presentation “The LCMS on the Role of
Women in the Church,” also providing copies of a formal opinion pro-
vided by the Synod’s Commission on Constitutional Matters, “Sugges-
tions for Congregational Constitutions or Bylaws Regarding the Privi-
leges of Women (Voting and Holding Office),” and the CTCR reports
“Woman Suffrage in the Church” and “The Service of Women in Con-
gregational and Synodical Offices with Guidelines for Congregations.”

’ Particular attention was called to the latter document, published in Jan-
uary of 2005, and its “Guidelines for the Service of Women in Congre-
gational Offices.” He used these documents to demonstrate that the
question of the role of women in the Synod has been around for many
years and continues to be a significant issue. Particular attention was
called to the six conclusions from the 1968 report on women’s suffrage
included in his presentation outline, as well as the four major principles
made in the 1985 CTCR Report: “Scriptura! Principles and Ecclesial
Practice.” He stressed that while there is no biblical application of the
Order of Creation regarding the holding of positions in the civil estate,
this is not the case with regard to pastoral functions, in which case God
has spoken and women should not hold the pastoral office. The task
force report provided in the January 2005 document and its guidelines
were offered as a concise expression of the Synod’s position on the role
of women (and of men) at this time. lt was agreed that the AALC and
the LCMS are in doctrinal agreement regarding this issue.

In the general discussion that followed the presentations it was observed
that the eight meetings have demonstrated an outstanding spirit of col-
legiality, camaraderie, mutual respect, and desire to work together.
Questions were raised regarding the meaning of church fellowship and
readiness to move in that direction. While the relative tack of formal

2007 Convention Workbook

OTHER PERTINENT DOCUMENTS

documentation on the part of the AALC was noted, it was also noted
that the AALC has responded affirmatively to the LCMS documenta-
tion and does bring to the table a guia subscription to the Book of Con-
cord to accompany the documents that it has shared. It was agreed that,
while the church bodies may be on the road to fellowship, it would not
be possible to make this final recommendation without opportunity for
further discussion by church body representatives away from the joint
meetings, followed by at least one additional formal meeting.

Processes to be followed and deadlines to be met if a proposal for altar
and pulpit fellowship were to be brought to the church bodies’ 2007
conventions were discussed. It was agreed that another meeting should
be scheduled and that a document presenting the AALC’s understand-
ing of the doctrine of church fellowship would be prepared for discus-
sion along with discussions of any other remaining issues.

A joint statement prepared after the meeting included the following
paragraph: “The participants from both church bodies expressed satis-
faction with the meeting, characterizing the discussions as collegial and
hopeful. AALC’s Aadland expressed particular ‘satisfaction that
progress is being made.’ ‘We have been encouraged by our agreement
on sensitive issues including church and ministry, the charismatic
movement, and now also the role of women in the church,’ added
Nafzger of the LCMS.”

9. St. Louis, July 13-14, 2006:

The final meeting began with the review of a recent edition of the
AALC publication The Evangel, and its coverage of AALC convention
actions at the church body’s 19th General Convention. It was reported
that “almost unanimous support” was expressed by the convention for
the continuation of fellowship discussions with the LCMS. The con-
vention also determined to review the AALC Constitution, move to bi-
ennial conventions, consolidate the national ministry from ten to five
regions, increase mission efforts and the planting of new congregations,
and request the Commission on Doctrine and Church Relations to look
at fellowship-related issues.

To facilitate discussion of fellowship issues, Thomas Aadland presented
the paper “The AALC and the Doctrine of Church Fellowship,” pre-
pared by a pastor of the AALC in anticipation of discussions with the
LCMS. It was noted that the paper enjoys no official status and that the
AALC through tts Commission on Doctrine and Church Relations con-
tinues to work on formal theological statements, including a statement
on communion practice.

Addressing the topic “The LCMS and the Doctrine of Church Fellow-
ship,” Samuel Nafzger distributed copies of the February 2000 CTCR
document, “The Lutheran Understanding of Church Fellowship,” pro-
viding a historical background for the document and noting its approval
by convention action for continued use and guidance. He also distrib-
uted copies of the recent April 2004 CTCR document, “Guidelines for
Participation in Civic Events,” calling particular attention to its state-
ment on page 3 regarding “cases of discretion” and to the Synod’s offi-
cial position statement on page 33 of the CTCR February 2000 docu-
ment. He underscored that the basis for church fellowship is agreement
in doctrine and practice and that “fellowship” and “church fellowship”
need to be distinguished from each other. He noted the LCMS Consti-
tution’s definition of church fellowship in its Article VI and under-
scored the Franklin Clark Fry quotation in the February 2000 CTCR
document (p. 32): “Insistence upon agreement in doctrine as a precon-
dition for church fellowship is the distinguishing mark of Lutherans
among ai] Protestants and should never be relaxed.” Also calling atten-
tion to the same document’s section on fellowship in the Scriptures
(p. 30), he anticipated the release of a new CTCR document by 2007
regarding inter-Christian relationships at levels short of altar and pul-
pit fellowship, this in response to a 1981 request. Discussion followed
regarding the apptication of these principles in real life situations.

Addressing the topic “Close(d) Communion in the LCMS,” Raymond
Hartwig provided a printed presentation quoting key convention reso-
lutions (1995 Res. 3-08, “To Reaffirm the Practice of Close[d] Com-
munion”; 1998 Res. 3-05, “To Reaffirm Our Practice of Admission to
the Lord’s Supper”) and the “Concluding Summary” section of “**Ad-
mission to the Lord’s Supper,’ A Report of the Commission on Theol-
ogy and Church Relations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
(November, 1999)” (pp. 52-53). Discussion followed regarding pas-
toral responsibilities with regard to the Sacrament, the handling of ex-
traordinary situations, and the dangers of not taking this pastoral re-
sponsibility seriously.

Franklin Hays referred again to the document he presented to the March
7-8, 2006, meeting, “Responsible Administration of Communion,” as
he addressed “Close(d) Communion in the AALC.” He explained that
the AALC has very little history regarding this issue because the need
for closer attention has not arisen. He noted that the willingness on the
part of the Fort Wayne seminary to allow AALC students to commune