LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1979, Page 118

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

118 RESOLUTIONS

Our Synod, endeavoring to follow God’s will re
garding concord in the church, in 1969 declared itself to
be in pulpit and altar fellowship with The American
Lutheran Church and stated its earnest desire to “seek a
unified evangelical position and practice on the basis of
our commitment to the Gospel” (Denver Res. 3-15). In
the intervening decade blessings have resulted from our
Synod’s fellowship with the ALC. Some congregations
have found a basis for joint work and worship and have
grown in giving expression to their confessional unity.

Also on the national level areas of agreement are
evident, e.g., in the confessional basis as stated in both
our Synod’s and the ALC’s constitution; in the doctrine
of the Trinity; in the doctrine of justification by faith
alone. We rejoice over these areas of agreement and
praise God for them.

However, in spite of these positive experiences,
differences in doctrine and practice exist between our
Synod and the ALC. In its report to the Synod at the
1977 convention the CTCR stated (CW, p. 43):

After eight years and considerable discussion of doctrinal
differences, the report of the LCMS representatives on the
Commission of Fellowship make it painfully clear that
positions and practices of the ALC...are notin agreement
with the doctrinal position of the LCMS.

In response to this report the Synod passed Res.
3-02A at the 1977 convention declaring itself to be ina
state of “fellowship in protest” with the ALC.

It is evident that real differences of doctrine and
practice do exist between our Synod and the ALC. In its
1979 report to this convention the CTCR indicates that
this situation, which called for a state of “fellowship in
protest,” has not improved. At the same time, however,
it must be stated that there are a number of factors that
have led the CTCR to recommend that the “fellowship
in protest” should be continued at this time. Some of
these factors are:

1. The “Formula of Concord” conferences held re-
cently have revealed that in our Synod “there is consid-
erable evidence of theological disagreement and con-
fusion in understanding the nature and implications of
fellowship.”

2. Many of our own members are unaware of the
serious differences at the church-body level.

3. The CTCR has not completed the comprehensive
study on fellowship called for by Res. 3-02A of the 1977
convention.

Another factor that must be taken into consideration
is that many of our brothers and sisters and congre-
gations in the ALC are in doctrinal accord with us and
need our fraternal support at this time.

Having carefully considered all these factors, we
offer to the Synod in a spirit of love and brotherly
concern for our brothers and sisters both in our own
Synod and the ALC the following resolution with the
fervent prayer that God, our heavenly Father, through
the guidance of the Holy Spirit and in the name of our
Lord Jesus Christ, may yet give to us the confessional
unity and concord we seek with the ALC.

WHEREAS, On the basis of the Scripture and the
Confessions, the Synod held that agreement in doctrine
and practice is necessary for the establishment and
maintenance of altar and pulpit fellowship with another
church body; and

WHEREAS, Our Synod entered into a state of “fellow-
ship in protest” with the ALC in 1977 at the Dallas
convention on account of doctrinal disagreements in
the areas of:

a) inspiration, inerrancy, and authority of Scripture;

b) the ordination of women into the pastoral office;

c) the nature and basis of fellowship;

d) membership and participation in ecumenical
organizations (unionism); and

WHEREAS, The Commission on Theology and Church
Relations isin the process of preparing a comprehensive
study and report on the nature and implications of the
concept of fellowship; and

WHEREAS, The CTCR is to disseminate this report
throughout the Synod for widespread study; and

WHEREAS, The CTCR’s report to this convention
states: “The report of LCMS representatives to the ALC-
LCMS Commission on Fellowship indicates that the
divergence in doctrine and practice between our church
bodies is more evident now than it was two years ago.
We mention three specifics:

“7. During the biennium the ALC adopted a signif.
icant document dealing with Communion practices.
This document seems to abandon the so-called ‘Gales-
burg Rule’ traditionally accepted by the ALC, which
restricts Lutheran altars to Lutheran communicants.

“9 Discussions between the faculty representatives
of the two church bodies during the biennium have
brought to even clearer focus the marked difference
between their positions on the nature and authority of
the Scriptures, confessional identity, the ordination of
women, and the basis of fellowship.

“3 During the biennium the Division of Theological
Studies of the Lutheran Council in the U.S.A. released
its report of its Consultation on the Function of Doctrine
and Theology in the Light of the Unity of the Church.
This report, drafted by representatives of the three
major Lutheran bodies in the U.S.A., points to sharp
divergencies between the LCMS and other Lutheran
bodies on such important topics as Biblical authority,
confessional subscription, and the basis of fellowship”;
therefore be it

Resolved, That the LCMS remain in a state of
“fellowship in protest” with the ALC as that state is
defined in Dallas Res. 3-02A; and be it further

Resolved, That the Synod plead with all its members
to participate in the Bible studies to be shared with the
Synod by the CTCR on fellowship matters; and be it
further

Resolved, That we urge the CTCR to complete its
comprehensive study and report on the nature and
implications of fellowship and to disseminate the report
throughout the Synod for widespread study as soon aS