Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1975 · 51st Convention › Page 467
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1975, Page 467

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

REPORT ON DISSENT

F. Criticlam of Part Vt

tt is said that Part VI of “A Statement.” unlike Walther and the fathers,
holds that our confessional subscription binds us in every instance to the
contessiona! interpretation and use of each and every passage of Holy
Scripture to which reference is made in the symbolicel writings.

Properly understood, “A Statement” says precisely what Or. Arthur
Carl Piepkorn said in the January. 1958, issue of the Concordia Theological
Monthly. “In the public teaching of a Lutheran clergyman or instructor, he
must interpret the Sacred Scriptures according to the Symbols and not vice
versa. This does not mean that he is in any way prevented from considering
every possible legitimate interpretation that can be placed upon any given
passage or group of passages of the Sacred Scriptures. If in the process.
however, he were to come to a definitive conclusion incompatible with the
teaching of the Symbols, he would be bound in conscience and in moral
honesty to withdraw from the church which imposes such an obligation upon
him.” (Arthur Carl Piepkorn, “Suggested Principles for a Hermeneutics of
the Lutheran Symbols," CTM. 1958, p. 4)

Or. Piepkorn continues: “We are not bound to the exegesis which the
Symbols give of any particular passage which they choose to interpret.
Thus we need not believe that Psalm 119:1 refers to the Law in its strict sense
(FC Ep Vi 2) or that the scope of Gen. 17:4-8, 19-20 includes infant Baptism
(FC Ep XII 8), This does not mean. however, that we are free to reject a doc-
trinal conclusion which the Symbols draw from their interpretation (even
erroneously) of one or more passages. or that we may justify rejection of a
doctrinal conclusion by a disavowal one by one of the passages that the
Symbols cite in its support.” (/bid pp. 20-21)

Or. C. F. W. Walther's position relative to the binding nature of con-
fessional exegesis is given in the following quotation from his essay “Why
Should Our Pastors, Teachers, and Professors Subscribe Unconditionally
to the Symbolical Writings of Our Church?”:

However, since the Symbols are confessions of faith or doctrine,
the Church necessarily cannot require a subscription to those matters
which do not belong to doctrine... The same is true of the interpreta-
tion of certain Bible passages. The only criterion of an incontrovertible
“prophecy,” or interpretation of Scripture, which St. Paul demanded
is “Whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of
faith.” Rom. 12:6. If, for instance. an exegete does not reach the specific
sense of a Bible passage and yet interprets it in such a manner that his
interpretation rests on other clear Bible passages. he is indeed mis-
taken in supposing that a certain teaching is contained in this specific
Bible passage. but he is not erring in doctrine. In like manner he who
unconditionally subscribes to the Symbolical Books declares that the
interpretations which are contained in the Symbols are “according to
the analogy of faith.” (C. F. W. Walther, “Why Should Our Pastors,
Teachers and Professors Subscribe Unconditionally to the Symbolical
writings of Our Church.” CTM. 1947, p. 242)

22

Conclusion

The very fact that some of the formulations in "A Statement’ have been
subject to grave misinterpretation indicates that it participates in the limita-
tions of every Human attempt to express the content of Christian doctrine.
Because even the language of the Augsburg Confession was subject to mis-
understanding. Melanchthon remarked: “Nothing can be said so carefully
that it can avoid misrepresentation’ (Ap VII and Vill, 2: cf. XI, 84). In the in-
terest ot clarification at certain points in ‘A Statement.” the Commission on
Theology and Church Relations makes the following recommendations:

1, That future reprints of “A Statement” add to Article | a footnote
explaining the ferm “anonymous Christians.” to wit: people in pagan
cultures who through the influence in their lives of the universal
lordship of Christ have given themselves to seifiess service of others
even though they have not yet learned from the preaching of the
Gospel the name of Him under whom they live and by whose grace
they have been transformed

2. That Article Il, while rightly ascribing an instructional function to the
law. express more explicitly the accusing function of the law so that
it is clearly stated that the law always instructs in such a way that it
at the same time shows the need for constant repentance in the life
ot Christians.

3. That Article Ill contain an additional antithesis rejecting any view
of the church's mission that fails to recognize the witness value of
deeds of love which flow from faith.

4. That Article IV contain a statement on prophecy that recognizes
and expresses the broader connotations of the term “prophecy” in
the Old Testament

Since "A Statement’ does not presume to be a flawless articulation of
the doctrinal issues it treats. it can be freely acknowledged that continued
testing of the adequacy of its formulations is not only necessary but will
serve to strengthen its witness to the truth which it confesses. This having
been said. however, it must also be said that an examination of the major
criticisms of the theological formulations and content of ‘A Statement” has
shown no cause why the Commission on Theology and Church Relations
should alter its opinion of November 21. 1972:

We find the doctrinal content of ''A Statement’ to be in accord

with the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions and to contain

nothing contrary to them. We aiso find the doctrinal content of

“A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles" to be in

accord with the doctrinal position of The Lutheran Church—

Missouri Synod as it has been taught historically and expressed

in the ofticial doctrinal statements of the Synod

23

-——
ABBREVIATIONS
AC Augsburg Confession
Ap Apology of the Augsburg Confession
Ep Epitome of the Formuta of Concord
FC Formula of Concord
Lc Large Catechism
SA Smaicaid Articles
Sc Small Catechism
$D Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord
All citations trom the Lutheran Contessions are taken from the
Book of Concord edited byT G Tappert (Phitadelpnia Fortress
Press 1969) uniess otherwise noted

467