Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1973 · 50th Convention › Page 39

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1973, Page 39

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 front matter 18 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 159 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 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 Sheet 260 Page 6 Page 242 Page 243 Page 244 Page 245 Page 246 Page 247 Page 248 Page 249 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 277 Page 280 Page 281 Page 282 Page 273 Page 276 Page 283 Page 284 Sheet 301 Page 7 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 315 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 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 Sheet 423 Sheet 424 Sheet 425 Sheet 426 Sheet 427 Sheet 428 Page 396 Page 397 Page 398 Sheet 432 Page 400 Sheet 434 Page 402 Sheet 436 Sheet 437 Sheet 438 Page 406 Sheet 440 Page 408 Sheet 442 Page 410 Sheet 444 Page 412 Sheet 446 Sheet 447 Sheet 448 Sheet 449 Sheet 450 Sheet 451 Sheet 452 Sheet 453 Sheet 454 Sheet 455 Sheet 456 Sheet 457 Sheet 458 Sheet 459 Page 427 Sheet 461 Page 430 Sheet 463 Page 432 Sheet 465 Sheet 466 Sheet 467 Page 436 Sheet 469 Sheet 470 Page 4 Page 440 Sheet 473 Page 442 Sheet 475 Page 444 Sheet 477 Page 446 Sheet 479 Sheet 480 Page 449 Page 450 Page 451 Page 452 Page 453 Page 454 Page 455 Page 456 Page 457 Sheet 490 Sheet 491 Sheet 492 Sheet 493 Sheet 494 Sheet 495 Sheet 496 Sheet 497 Sheet 498 Sheet 499 Sheet 500 Page 1 Page 470 Sheet 503 Page 472 Sheet 505 Page 474 Page 13 Page 476 Page 1 Sheet 510

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

THEOLOGY AND CHURCH RELATIONS 39

Davidie authorship of the Psalm.” (Cf. The Witness of Jesus and
Old Testament Authorship)
8. On the subject of Biblical authorship, the commission has
stated:
The Synod has affirmed that we are to accept whatever the Bible
says about itself, including its human authorship, but has also recog-
nized that isagogical matters not conclusively answered by the
Scriptures are not matters of doctrine and should therefore not be
treated as factors affecting the Christian fellowship.” (An Evaluation
of “A Call to Openness and Trust’. p. 6, point 4 b)

The commission has also discussed the question of authorship in
its document The Witness of Jesus and Old Testament Author-
ship and in A Response to Questions on “The Witness of Jesus
and Old Testament Authorship.”

9. Holy Scripture is the sole standard for determining what
is “doctrine” and whether “doctrine” is true or false. The
Lutheran Confessions, because they are “drawn from the Word
of God” (Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Rule and Norm,
10), are a secondary norm for the faith and life of the church.
But the confessions do not claim to deal with all doctrinal ques-
tions. Treatment or nontreatment in the confessions is therefore
not a criterion for determining whether a question is doctrinal.
Accordingly, questions not treated in the confessions but dealt
with in the Scriptures may well be “doctrinal” questions.

Conclusion

The Commission on Theology and Church Relations holds
that the document entitled “A Review of the Question ‘What
Is a Doctrine?’” does not maintain that matters pertaining to
the authorship of Biblical books and the historicity of certain
Biblical accounts are outside the scope of “doctrine.” Teachings
and judgments on such matters ordinarily are not considered
“doctrine” or “doctrines” in themselves. However, any teaching
or judgment which denies or contradicts what the Scriptures
teach must be considered “false doctrine.” For such a denial
or contradiction is in conflict with the doctrine of the authority
of Holy Scripture, the only infallible source and norm of all
doctrine. Moreover, the doctrine of the person of Jesus Christ
is also involyed in the consideration of any of His statements,
including those which deal with isagogical or historical matters.
In short, the commission holds that it is a doctrinal matter to
contradict or deny whatever the Bible teaches on any subject.

Adopted by the CTCR. May 24. 1971

APPENDIX C
“Key 73° Guidelines

We thank and praise God for all those who with us realize
that the Gospel of Christ is His power unto salvation to all who
believe it and for the opportunity that the “Key 73” program pre-
sents to proclaim that saving message in “Calling Our Continent
to Christ.”

Unfortunately, not all church bodies are in doctrinal agree-
ment. Therefore participating in a venture such as “Key 73”
involves pitfalls and inherent dangers which ought to be avoided
in the interest of the proclamation of Scriptural truth. It was for
this reason that Synod’s decision to participate in the “Key 73”
program was under the explicit condition that such participation
“not violate our doctrinal positions’ and be ‘to the extent that
our fellowship principles permit” (Res. 8-02, 1971, Proceedings.
p. 187). To aid members of the Synod, the CTCR was directed
to draft guidelines for participation in the “Key 73” program.

Under the theme ‘Calling Our Continent to Christ,” the “Key
73” program is so structured as to provide for participation on
essentially three levels:

a. Separately: Those parts of the program done by the
churches on their own.

b. Simultaneously: Those things done by the individual
church concurrently with other participating churches.

c. Cooperatively: Those things done jointly by the churches.
Each church has the privilege of determining for itself the
degree and level of participation.

The greatest degree of tension would arise for members of
The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod on the cooperative level
of participation. It is especially urgent that The Lutheran
Church— Missouri Synod avoid any activity that would negate
its distinctively Lutheran witness. Care should be taken that we

do not implicitly or explicitly convey an attitude of indifference
to Scriptural truth and thereby negate the witness that confes-
sional Lutheranism can and must make in our day. This concern
would apply particularly to joint participation in rallies, worship
services, prayer meetings, and such other cooperative activities
where our doctrinal position may be compromised. But the prin-
ciple must also be applied to all aspects of the program.

Lutheran theology has a unique contribution to make in such
an evangelization effort. The Christ-honoring proclamation of
God's pure grace and of man’s need for it because his nature is
depraved, the proper distinction and use of Law and Gospel.
and the emphasis upon the depth of God's love seeking an es-
tranged and alienated mankind when man would have none of
Him are such distinctively Lutheran doctrines to which we must
bear witness in any evangelism program in which we participate.

In light of the above factors, it is the recommendation of the
CTCR that:

1. The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod’s participation be
principally on the separate level. Many things for which The
Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod assumes separate respon-
sibility, however, may well be carried out simultaneously to
maximize the impact on the community.

2, The Synod’s Board of Evangelism provide literature.
tracts, worship and publicity materials which communicate what
is distinctively Lutheran.

3. The training of callers, canvassers, and counselors be
carried out by our own personnel using materials recommended
by the Synod's Board of Evangelism.

4. Worship services, prayer meetings, rallies, and such
gatherings be conducted under Lutheran auspices. either by
members of the Synod or with others with whom the Synod is in
fellowship.

5. The Board of Evangelism provide Bible study materials
suitable for neighborhood Bible study groups for use by our
people.

6. The members of the Synod in all things try to uphold and
observe the doctrinal position and the fellowship policies of
The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod.

7. The members of the Synod implore the blessing of Al-
mighty God that the efforts of the “Key 73" program, under His
grace and by the power of His Holy Spirit, may lead many to
faith in Jesus Christ and salvation.

‘Adopted by the CTCR. March 14, 1972)

APPENDIX D

An Evaluation of the Faculty Document

“Faithful To Our Calling. Faithful To Our Lord. Part I:
A Witness to our Faith”

The Commission on Theology and Church Relations is grate-
ful to the faculty of the St. Louis seminary for the preparation of
this document in which they give a corporate expression of their
faith and for the insights which it gives the church into certain
of their teachings. The Commission on Theology and Church
Relations also rejoices with them in the expression of their faith
in Jesus Christ as their personal Lord and Savior. a faith shared
by all true Christians.

As the Commission on Theology and Church Relations seeks
to respond to the many requests for an evaluation of this docu-
ment, it will not attempt to deal exhaustively with all the ques-
tions raised by the document. Rather, it will address itself prin-
cipally to two considerations: (1) Does the document reflect
a correct understanding of the issues under debate in the
Synod? (2) Is the document suited for use in discussion forums
throughout the Synod where the issues under debate are to be
studied?

This approach is suggested by the document itself. The docu-
ment has been presented to the church as a ‘‘corporate expres-
sion of our faith and a discussion on the issues under debate”
(p. 3; emphasis added). It is further stated that “the discussions
provide us with a responsible set of statements which are suit-
able for use in discussion forums throughout Synod.” (Ibid..
p. 4; emphasis added)

The purpose of this evaluation, then. is to determine whether
or not the document Faithful To Our Calling. Faithful To Our
Lord. Part I, carries out its stated purpose. It is not the intent of
this evaluation to investigate the personal faith of individual