LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1973, Page 132

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

132 SEMINARY ISSUES

Wuereas, The historical-critical method of interpreting
the Bible is the principle method of interpretation used at
our St.Louis seminary, as testified to by Dr. John Tietjen
in “Statement to the Seminary Community,” March 6, 1972;
and

Wuenreas, Considerable confusion has existed as to what
the historical-critical method really is, being confused with
the long-time “historical-grammatical” method; and

WHEREAS, Some CTCR members have already stated pub-
licly how destructive this method is — it destroys the au-
thority of Scripture —in a meeting of the South Wisconsin
District pastors’ conference, held at Madison, Wis., Oct. 24,
1972; and

WHErEas, Our synodical President, together with many
other faithful servants of God’s Word have contended
against those who force this destructive method upon the
church and future pastors of the church; therefore be it

Resolved, That we, the members of St. John’s Lutheran
Congregation of Chaska, Minn., in a lawfully called Voters’
Assembly on Feb. 27, 1973, do publicly and officially stand
opposed to this destructive method of Bible interpretation
being used singly; and be it further

Resolved, That we encourage our synodical President and
all faithful servants of His Word, to vigorously do battle
against this satanic method being used singly: and be it
further

Resolved, That St. John’s Lutheran Church formulate this
memorial, requesting the synodical convention of the LCMS
meeting in New Orleans, July 1973 to take action against the
use of this destructive method singly without guidance in
its use thereof by the presuppositions of faith in the Lord
of history; and be it finally

Resolved, That we encourage all our people to pray for
our Synod, our President of Synod, our faithful servants of
the Word as well as those who have been blinded by confu-
sion or Satan’s lies. We invite our members to seek the
Lord’s intervention and help to retain His Word in all its
truth and purity and to stand on His sure Word, no matter

the cost. St. Jonn's LUTHERAN CHURCH
Chaska, Minn.
Henry Wrase, Chairman
Robert Berkey, Secretary
3-58A

To Reject Use of Historical-Critical Method

Wuereas, The so-called “historical-critical method” of
approaching and interpreting the Scriptures has been gradu-
ally brought into our synodical colleges and seminaries, al-
though it was 15 years ago rejected by these same schools;
and

Wuereas, The “method” has nowhere been defined in our
church so that we know what is actually being employed in
the approach and interpretation of Scripture currently taught
in our schools; and

Wuereas, The one study of the CTCR relative to this
so-called method has approved only those aspects of it
which conform to the traditional grammatical and historical
approach to Scripture common to the hermeneutical princi-
ples of the Reformation: and

WuHereas, The CTCR study lists many controls to the
“method” which are in fact contrary to the accepted presup-
positions of the method, thus in effect outlaws the method:
and

Wuereas, The method, although never clearly defined,
is at the same time self-contained, having certain definite
presuppositions (e.g. that Christian doctrine developed in
a natural way; that Scripture contains contradictory theolo-
gies; that the inspired text of Scripture as such in its in-
tended meaning is not the final authority for what Jesus
said and did and for Christian doctrine; and sometimes that
history is understood as happening in a closed continuum
which does not allow for divine intervention into space and
time); and

WHEREAS, These presuppositions are incompatible with
any personal attitude of faith and contrary to the Biblical

and confessional position of our church on the divine origin
and authority of Scripture; therefore be it

Resolved, That no teachers in our synodical colleges and
seminaries use or teach according to the historical-critical
method of approaching and interpreting Scripture; and be it
further

Resolved, That all teachers in our synodical colleges and
seminaries point out the faults in the historical-critical
method, including its sub-Christian presuppositions and the
false and unchristian conclusions drawn from such a method;
and be it further

Resolved, That all teachers and administrators in our
synodical colleges and seminaries who cannot or. will not
be led to see the unchristian stance of the method, and dem-
onstrate their change in attitude by a public repudiation
of the method by the end of this calendar year, be suspended
and finally removed from their teaching posts; and be it
further

Resolved, That all new teachers at our colleges and semi-
naries be closely questioned on their theological stance, with
special attention to the historical-critical method, and that
they not be engaged to teach if they adhere to or permit —
as a viable option — this method; and be it further

Resolved, That all synodical and District officers and
board members be asked to repudiate the historical-critical
method publicly, and if this has not been done by the end
of the calendar year, that they be removed from their posi-
tions; and be it finally

Resolved, That every pastor and teacher in the Synod be
required to sign a statement repudiating the historical-criti-
cal method by the end of this calendar year, and that those
pastors and teachers who refuse to do so be removed from
membership in the Synod, and the congregation or schools
which employ them be informed that they are to terminate
the services of such erring pastors or teachers, and that if
this is not done, they will have their membership in the
Synod terminated,

TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH
Bend, Oreg.

Rev. Walter A. Anderson, Pastor
Roy A. Scurlock, Secretary

Similar:

3-58B

Christ Lutheran Church, Coos Bay, Oreg., Ed Schwartz,
President; Gary Tonn, Secretary, but without the last four
resolveds.

3-58C

St. Johns Ev. Lutheran Church, Wykoff, Minn., Charles
Kaun, Secretary (very brief).

3-59A
To Remove Historical-Critical Method

Wuereas, We believe the use of the historical-critical
method is the root cause for many of the problems of Bible
interpretation which are troubling the church; and

Wuereas, The historical-critical method of interpreting
the Bible is the principle method of interpretation used at
our St. Louis seminary; and

Whereas, Dr. John Tietjen, president of our St. Louis
seminary, has stated publicly that it is not possible for a
seminary professor to teach courses in Bible interpretation
at the seminary level without using the historical-critical
method (March 6, 1972, “Statement to the Seminary Com-
munity”); and

Wuereas, Considerable confusion has existed as to what
the historical-critical method really is (many in the church
have confused it with the historical-grammatical method,
which has long been in common use in the Christian
church); and

Wuereas, Members of the CTCR have been commissioned
to study and evaluate this method of Biblical interpretation
and to participate in District pastor-teacher conferences
(Milwaukee Proceedings, Res. 2-52); and