A Statement of Scriptural and
Confessional Principles
Table of Contents:
The Canonical Text of Scripture
The Infallibility of Scripture
Historical Methods of Biblical
Interpretation
The Resolution of the Missouri
Synod Adopting A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles
We believe, teach
and confess that Jesus Christ is our Savior and Lord,
and that through faith in Him we receive forgiveness of sins, eternal life and
salvation. We confess that “our works cannot reconcile God or merit
forgiveness of sins and grace, but that we obtain forgiveness and grace only by
faith when we believe that we are received into favor
for Christ’s sake, who alone has been ordained to be the mediator and
propitiation through whom the Father is reconciled” (Tappert
tr., AC, XX, 9, Latin text,
p. 42;
Kolb/Wengert, pp. 5455).
We believe
that Jesus Christ is the only way to heaven and that all who die without faith
in Him are eternally damned. We believe that those who
believe in Christ will enjoy a blissful relationship with Him during the interim
between their death and His second coming, and that on the last day their
bodies will be raised.
We
therefore reject the following:
1.
That we may operate on the assumption that there may
be other ways of salvation than through faith in Jesus Christ.
2.
That some persons who lack faith in Christ may be
considered “anonymous Christians.”
3.
That there is no eternal hell for unbelievers and
ungodly men.
We believe
that the two chief doctrines of Holy Scripture, Law and Gospel, must be
constantly and diligently proclaimed in the
The Law,
as the expression of God’s immutable will, is to be used by the church to
bring men to a knowledge of their sins as well as to provide Christians with
instruction about good works (FC, SD, V, 1718).
The Gospel
receives the primary emphasis in the ministry of the New Testament, for it is
the message that “God forgives them all their sins through Christ, accepts
them for His sake as God’s children, and out of pure grace, without any
merit of their own, justifies and saves them” (Tappert
tr., FC, SD, V, 25,
p. 563;
Kolb/Wengert, p. 586).
We
therefore reject the following:
1.
That the Gospel is any message or action which brings
good news to a bad situation.
2.
That the Gospel is a norm or standard for the
Christian life, or that the Gospel, in effect, imposes a new law upon the
Christian.
3.
That what God’s Law declares to be sinful (for
example, adultery or theft) need not be regarded as sinful in all times and
situations.
4.
That Christians, as men who have been freed from the
curse of the Law, no longer need the instruction of the Law to know what
God’s will is for their life and conduct.
We
believe, teach and confess that the primary mission of the church is to make
disciples of every nation by bearing witness to Jesus Christ through the
preaching of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments.
Other
necessary activities of the church, such as ministering to men’s physical
needs, are to serve the church’s primary mission and its goal that men
will believe and confess Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior.
We
therefore reject any views of the mission of the church which imply that an
adequate or complete witness to Jesus Christ can be made without proclaiming or
verbalizing the Gospel.
We
believe, teach and confess that all Scripture is given by the inspiration of
God the Holy Spirit and that God is therefore the true Author of every word of
Scripture. We acknowledge that there is a qualitative difference between the
inspired witness of Holy Scripture in all its parts and words and the witness
of every other form of human expression, making the Bible a unique book.
We
therefore reject the following views:
1.
That the Holy Scriptures are
inspired only in the sense that all Christians are “inspired” to
confess the lordship of Jesus Christ.
2.
That the Holy Spirit did not inspire the actual words
of the Biblical authors but merely provided these men with special guidance.
3.
That only those matters in Holy Scripture were
inspired by the Holy Spirit which directly pertain to
Jesus Christ and man’s salvation.
4.
That noncanonical writings
in the Christian tradition can be regarded as “inspired” in the
same sense as Holy Scripture.
5.
That portions of the New
Testament witness to Jesus Christ contain imaginative additions, which had
their origin in the early Christian community and do not present actual facts.
We believe
that all Scripture bears witness to Jesus Christ and that its primary purpose
is to make men wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. We therefore
affirm that the Scriptures are rightly used only when they are read from the
perspective of justification by faith and the proper distinction between Law
and Gospel.
Since the
saving work of Jesus Christ was accomplished through His personal entrance into
our history and His genuinely historical life, death and resurrection, we
acknowledge that the recognition of the soteriological
purpose of Scripture in no sense permits us to call into question or deny the
historicity or factuality of matters recorded in the Bible.
We
therefore reject the following views:
1.
That knowing the facts and data presented in the
Scripture, without relating them to Jesus Christ and His work of salvation,
represents an adequate approach to Holy Scripture.
2.
That the Old Testament, read on its own terms, does
not bear witness to Jesus Christ.
3.
That it is permissible to reject the historicity of
events or the occurrence of miracles recorded in the Scriptures so long as
there is no confusion of Law and Gospel.
4. That recognition of
the primary purpose of Scripture makes it irrelevant whether such questions of
fact as the following are answered in the affirmative: Were Adam and Eve real
historical individuals? Did
Jesus really born of a virgin? Did Jesus perform all the
miracles attributed to Him? Did Jesus’ resurrection actually involve the
return to life of His dead body?
(Material and
Formal Principles)
We
believe, teach and confess that the Gospel of the gracious justification of the
sinner through faith in Jesus Christ is not only the chief doctrine of Holy
Scripture and a basic presupposition for the interpretation of Scripture, but
is the heart and center of our Christian faith and
theology (material principle). We also believe, teach, and confess that only
“the Word of God shall establish articles of faith” (Tappert tr., SA, II, ii, 15, p. 295; Kolb/Wengert, p. 304), and that “the prophetic and
apostolic writings of the Old and New Testaments are the only rule and norm
according to which all doctrines and teachers alike must be appraised and
judged” (Tappert tr., FC, Ep,
Rule and Norm, 1, p. 464; Kolb/Wengert, p. 486)
(formal principle). The Gospel, which is the center
of our theology, is the Gospel to which the Scriptures bear witness, while the
Scriptures from which we derive our theology direct us steadfastly to the Gospel
of Jesus Christ.
We reject
the following distortions of the relationship between the Gospel and the Bible
(the material and formal principles):
1.
That acceptance of the Bible as such, rather than the
Gospel, is the heart and center of Christian faith and
theology, and the way to eternal salvation.
2.
That the Gospel, rather than Scripture, is the norm
for appraising and judging all doctrines and teachers (as, for example, when a
decision on the permissibility of ordaining women into the pastoral office is
made on the basis of the “Gospel” rather than on the teaching of
Scripture as such).
3.
That the historicity or facticity
of certain Biblical accounts (such as the Flood or the Fall)
may be questioned, provided this does not distort the gospel.
4.
That Christians need not accept matters taught in the
Scriptures that are not a part of the “Gospel.”
We believe, teach
and confess that because the Scriptures have God as their author, they possess
both the divine power to make men wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus
Christ (causative authority), as well as the divine authority to serve as the
church’s sole standard of doctrine and life (normative authority). We
recognize that the authority of Scripture can be accepted only through faith
and not merely by rational demonstration. As men of faith, we affirm not only
that Holy Scripture is powerful and efficacious, but also that it is “the
only judge, rule, and norm according to which, as the only touchstone, all
doctrines should and must be understood, and judged as good or evil, right or
wrong.” (Tappert tr., FC, Ep,
Rule and Norm, 7, p. 465; Kolb/Wengert, p. 487)
We
therefore reject the following views:
1.
That the authority of Scripture is limited to its
efficacy in bringing men to salvation in Jesus Christ.
2.
That the authority of Scripture has reference only to
what the Scriptures do (as means of grace) rather than to what they are (as the
inspired Word of God).
3.
That the Scriptures are authoritative for the doctrine
and life of the church, not because of their character as the inspired and
inerrant Word of God, but because they are the oldest available written sources
for the history of ancient Israel and for the life and message of Jesus Christ,
or because they were written by the chosen and appointed leaders of Israel and
of the early church, or because the church declared them to be canonical.
4.
That the Christian community in every age is directly
inspired by the Holy Spirit and is therefore free to go beyond the doctrine of
the prophets and apostles in determining the content of certain aspects of its
faith and witness.
We believe, teach
and confess that the authoritative Word for the church today is the canonical
Word, not precanonical sources, forms or traditions,
however useful the investigation of these possibilities may on occasion be for
a clearer understanding of what the canonical text intends to say. We therefore reject the following
views:
1.
That there are various “meanings” of a
Biblical text or pericope to be discovered at various
stages of its precanonical history, or that the
meaning a canonical text has now may differ from the meaning it had when it was
first written.
2.
That Biblical materials that are judged to
be “authentic” (for example, “authentic” words of
Jesus, “authentic” books of Paul, or “authentic” ideas
of Moses) have greater authority than “nonauthentic”
Biblical statements.
3.
That certain pericopes or
passages in the canonical text of Scripture may be regarded as imaginative
additions of the Biblical authors or of the early Christian community and
therefore need not be accepted as fully authoritative.
4.
That extracanonical sources may be used in
such a way as to call into question the clear meaning of the canonical text.
5.
That the essential theological data of Biblical
theology is to be found in the precanonical history
of the Biblical text.
6.
That certain canonical materials have greater
authority than other canonical materials because of their greater antiquity or
because they are allegedly more “genuine” or
“authentic.”
7.
That various statements of Jesus recorded in the
Gospels may not actually be from Jesus and therefore lack historical factuality
or the full measure of His authority.
With Luther, we
confess that “God’s Word cannot err” (Tappert
tr., LC, IV [Baptism], 57, p. 444; Kolb/Wengert, p.
464).We therefore believe, teach and confess that since the Holy Scriptures are
the Word of God, they contain no errors or contradictions but that they are in
all their parts and words the infallible truth.
We hold
that the opinion that Scripture contains errors is a violation of the sola
scriptura [Scripture alone], for it rests upon the acceptance of some norm or
criterion of truth above the Scriptures. We recognize that there are apparent
contradictions or discrepancies and problems which arise because of uncertainty
over the original text.
We reject
the following views:
1.
That the Scriptures contain theological as well as
factual contradictions and errors.
2.
That the Scriptures are inerrant only in matters pertaining
directly to the Gospel message of salvation.
3.
That the Scriptures are only functionally inerrant
that is, that the Scriptures are “inerrant” only in the sense that
they accomplish their aim of bringing the Gospel of salvation to men.
4.
That the Biblical authors accommodated themselves to
using and repeating as true the erroneous notions of their day (for example,
the claim that Paul’s statements on the role of women in the church are
not binding today because they are the culturally conditioned result of the
apostle’s sharing the views of contemporary Judaism as a child of his
time).
5.
That statements of Jesus and the New Testament writers
concerning the human authorship of portions of the Old Testament or the
historicity of certain Old Testament persons and events need not be regarded as
true (for example, the Davidic authorship of Psalm 110, the historicity of
Jonah, or the fall of Adam and Eve).
6.
That only those aspects of a Biblical statement need
to be regarded as true that are in keeping with the alleged intent of the
passage (for example, that Paul’s statements about Adam and Eve in Romans
5 and 1 Corinthians 11 do not prove the historicity of Adam and Eve because
this was not the specific intent of the apostle; or that the virgin birth of
our Lord may be denied because the infancy narratives in Matthew and Luke did
not have the specific intent to discuss a biological miracle).
7.
That Jesus did not make some of the statements or
perform some of the deeds attributed to him in the Gospels but that they were
in fact invented or created by the early Christian community or the evangelists
to meet their specific needs.
8.
That the Biblical authors sometimes placed statements
into the mouths of people who in fact did not make them (for example, the claim
that the “Deuteronomist” places a speech
in Solomon’s mouth which Solomon never actually made), or that they
relate events as having actually taken place that did not in fact occur (for
example, the fall of Adam and Eve, the crossing of the Red Sea on dry land, the
episode of the brazen serpent, Jesus’ cursing of the fig tree, John the
Baptist’s experiences in the wilderness, Jesus’ changing water into
wine, Jesus’ walking on water, or even Jesus’ bodily resurrection
from the dead or the fact of His empty tomb).
9.
That the use of certain “literary forms”
necessarily calls into question the historicity of that which is being
described (for example, that the alleged midrashic
form of the infancy narratives in Matthew and Luke suggests that no virgin
birth actually occurred, or that the literary form of Genesis 3 argues against
the historicity of the Fall).
We believe, teach
and confess that since the same God speaks throughout Holy Scripture, there is
an organic unity both within and between the Old and New Testaments. While
acknowledging the rich variety of language and style in Scripture and
recognizing differences of emphasis in various accounts of the same event or
topic, we nevertheless affirm that the same doctrine of the Gospel, in all its
articles, is presented throughout the entire Scripture.
We reject
the view that Holy Scripture, both within and between its various books and
authors, presents us with conflicting or contradictory teachings and
theologies. We regard this view not only as violating the Scripture’s own
understanding of itself, but also as making it impossible for the church to
have and confess a unified theological position that is truly Biblical and
evangelical.
Since the New Testament
is the culminating written revelation of God, we affirm that it is decisive in
determining the relation between the two Testaments and the meaning of Old
Testament prophecies in particular, for the meaning of a prophecy becomes known
in full only from its fulfillment. With the Lutheran
Confessions, we recognize the presence of Messianic prophecies about Jesus
Christ throughout the Old Testament. Accordingly, we acknowledge that the Old
Testament “promises that the Messiah will come and promises forgiveness
of sins, justification, and eternal life for His sake” (Tappert tr., Apology [Defense],
IV, 5, p. 108; Kolb/Wengert, p. 121) and that the
patriarchs and their descendants comforted themselves with such Messianic
promises (cf. FC, SD, V, 23).
We
therefore reject the following views:
1.
That the New Testament statements about Old Testament
texts and events do not establish their meaning (for example, the claim that
Jesus’ reference to Psalm 110 in Matthew 22:4344 does not establish
either the psalm’s Davidic authorship or its predictive Messianic
character).
2.
That Old Testament prophecies are to be regarded
as Messianic prophecies, not in the sense of being genuinely predictive, but
only in the sense that the New Testament later applies them to New Testament
events.
3.
That the Old Testament prophets never recognized that
their prophecies reached beyond their own time to the time of Christ.
Since God is the Lord
of history and has revealed Himself by acts in history and has in the person of
His Son actually entered into man’s history, we acknowledge that the
historical framework in which the Gospel message is set in Scripture is an
essential part of the Word.
Furthermore,
we recognize that the inspired Scriptures are historical documents written in
various times, places and circumstances. We therefore believe that the
Scriptures invite historical investigation and are to be taken seriously as
historical documents. We affirm, however, that the Christian interpreter of
Scripture cannot adopt uncritically the presuppositions and canons of the
secular historian, but that he will be guided in his use of historical
techniques by the presuppositions of his faith in the Lord of history, who
reveals Himself in Holy Scripture as the one who creates, sustains, and even
enters our history in order to lead it to His end.
We
therefore reject the following views:
1. That the question
of whether certain events described in the Scripture actually happened is
unimportant in view of the purpose and function of Holy Scripture.
2. That methods based
on secularistic and naturalistic notions of history,
such as the following, may have a valid role in Biblical interpretation:
a.
That the universe
is closed to the intervention of God or any supernatural force.
b.
That miracles are to be
explained in naturalistic terms whenever possible.
c.
That the principle of the
economy of miracles may lead us to deny certain miracles reported in the
Scriptures.
d.
That the doctrines
of Holy Scripture are the result of a natural development or evolution of ideas
and experiences within
e.
That the message of Scripture
can be adequately measured by laws derived exclusively from empirical data and
rational observation.
f.
That man’s inability to
know the future makes genuine predictive prophecy an
impossibility.
1.
That our primary concern in Biblical interpretation is
not with explaining the meaning of the primary sources, namely, the canonical
Scriptures, on the basis of the sources themselves.
2.
That if the use of historical methods leads to
conclusions at variance with the evident meaning of the Biblical text, subconclusions may be accepted without violating the
Lutheran view of Scripture or our commitment to the Lutheran Confessions (for
example, the claim that it is permissible to deny the existence of angels or a
personal devil because of literary, historical or theological considerations).
We
believe, teach and confess that God, by the almighty power of His Word, created
all things.
We also
believe that man, as the principal creature of God, was specially created in the
image of God, that is, in a state of righteousness, innocence and blessedness.
We affirm
that Adam and Eve were real historical human beings, the first two people in
the world, and that their fall was a historical occurrence which brought sin
into the world so that “since the fall of Adam all men who are propagated
according to nature are born in sin” (Tappert
tr., AC, II, 1, Latin text, p. 29; Kolb/Wengert, pp.
3637). We confess that man’s fall necessitated the gracious redemptive
work of Jesus Christ and that fallen man’s only hope for salvation from
his sin lies in Jesus Christ, his Redeemer and Lord.
We
therefore reject the following:
1.
All world views, philosophical theories and exegetical
interpretations that pervert these Biblical teachings and thus obscure the
Gospel.
2.
The notion that man did not come into being through
the direct creative action of God, but through a process of evolution from
lower forms of life, which in turn developed from matter that is either
eternal, autonomous or selfgenerating.
3.
The opinion that the image of God in which Adam and
Eve were created did not consist of concreated
righteousness, that is, a perfect relationship to God.
4.
The notion that Adam and Eve were not real historical
persons and that their fall was not a real historical event which brought sin
and death into the world.
5.
The opinion that original sin does not deprive all men
of their spiritual powers and make it impossible for them to be in the right
relationship to God apart from faith in Jesus Christ.
We
reaffirm our acceptance of the Scriptures as the inspired and inerrant Word of
God, and our unconditional subscription to “all the Symbolical Books of
the
We accept
the Confessions because they are drawn from the Word of God and on that account
regard their doctrinal content as a true and binding exposition of Holy
Scripture and as authoritative for our work as ministers of Jesus Christ and
servants of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.
We accept
the following clarifications of the nature of our confessional subscription:
1.
We acknowledge that the doctrinal content of the
Lutheran Confessions includes not only those doctrines of Holy Scripture
explicitly treated in the Confessions but also those Biblical doctrines set
forth somewhat indirectly or incidentally, such as the doctrines of Holy
Scripture, creation, the Holy Spirit, and eschatology.
2.
With the fathers, we recognize that not everything in
the Lutheran Confessions is a part of its doctrinal content, but we reject all
attempts to abridge the extent of this doctrinal content in an arbitrary or
subjective manner. We recognize, for example, that subscription to the Lutheran
Confessions does not bind us to all strictly exegetical details contained in
the Confessions, or even to the confessional use of certain Bible passages to
support a particular theological statement. However, since the Confessions want
to be understood as Biblical expositions, we reject the notion that we are not
bound by our confessional subscription to the exposition of Scripture contained
in the Confessions or to the doctrinal content which the Confessions derive
from individual Bible passages.
3.
We recognize that the Confessions must be read and
studied in terms of the historical situations in which they were written, but
we reject the view that our confessional subscription means only that we regard
the Confessions as a historically correct response to the problems encountered
by the church when the Confessions were written.
4.
We recognize that the doctrinal content of the
Confessions centers in Jesus Christ and the Gospel of
our justification by grace through faith, but we reject the view that the
doctrinal content of the Confessions includes only those confessional
statements which explicitly and directly deal with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Accordingly,
we do not accept the idea that our subscription to the Lutheran Confessions permits
us to reject such confessional positions as the existence of the devil and of
angels or that Adam and Eve were real historical persons whose fall into sin
was a real historical event.
5.
We recognize that the Lutheran Confessions contain no
distinct article on the nature of Holy Scripture and its interpretation, but we
acknowledge and accept the confessional understanding of the nature of Holy
Scripture and of the proper theological principles for its interpretation.
6.
We recognize the Lutheran Confessions as a true
exposition of Holy Scripture and therefore reject the opinion that our
subscription to the Lutheran Confessions leaves us free to reject any doctrinal
statements of the Confessions where we feel there is no supporting Biblical
evidence.
7.
We acknowledge that our subscription to the Lutheran
Confessions pledges us to preach and teach in accordance with the entire Holy
Scripture. We therefore reject the opinion that all Biblical matters not
explicitly treated in the Lutheran Confessions are open questions.
8.
We confess that the Holy Scriptures are the only rule
and norm for faith and life, and that other writings “should not be put
on a par with Holy Scripture” (Tappert tr., FC,
Ep, Rule and Norm, 12, pp. 464465; Kolb/Wengert, p. 486).We therefore reject the notion that it is
legitimate to maintain the doctrinal conclusions of the Confessions without
accepting their Biblical basis, or to regard formal confessional subscription
as an adequate safeguard against improper exegetical conclusions.
9.
Finally, we affirm that our acceptance of the Lutheran
Confessions means not only that we tolerate the doctrinal content of the
Lutheran Confessions as a viable option for Lutheran Christians today but that
we in fact preach, teach, and confess the doctrinal content of the Lutheran
Confessions as our very own.
The 1971
convention of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod reaffirmed the
Synod’s desire to abide by its doctrinal position as stated in its
constitution (Article II). The Synod clearly stated its conviction that its
confessional base is as broad as Holy Scripture and that the Synod accepts
anything and everything that the Scriptures teach. Moreover, the Synod declared
its right as a Synod to apply its confessional base definitively to current
issues, and thus conserve and promote unity and resist an individualism which
breeds schism.
This
Statement expresses the Synod’s Scriptural and confessional stance on a
number of important topics. It is hoped that the endorsement of this Statement
will be of assistance to the Synod in the “conservation and promotion of
the unity of the true faith” (Constitution, Article III).
In its July 613,
1973, synodical convention, The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod officially adopted A Statement of Scriptural and
Confessional Principles as a “statement of belief” which
“expresses the Synod’s position on current doctrinal issues.”
The full text of the convention’s action is as follows:
Preamble
The
Formula of Concord, in the Lutheran Confessions, mentions Doctor Luther as
asserting that "the Word of God is and should remain the sole rule and
norm of doctrine, and that no human being’s writings dare be placed on a
par with it, but that everything be subjected to it." The next paragraph
begins: "This, of course, does not mean that other good, useful, and pure
books such as interpretations of the Holy Scriptures, refutations of errors, and
expositions of doctrinal articles, should be rejected. If
they are in accord with the aforementioned pattern of doctrine they are to be
accepted and used as helpful expositions and explanations" (Tappert tr., FC, SD, Summary, paragraphs 910, p 503; Kolb/Wengert, pp. 528529).
Doctor
Walther’s “Thirteen Theses,” which emerged during the Predestinarian Controversy in
Our Synod
has continued to be greatly concerned with doctrine, as past convention
resolutions indicate (19501971). Also, in order to clarify the status of
doctrinal statements, the Synod approved Resolution 524, “Status of Synodically Adopted Doctrinal Statements,” at the
Resolved,
That the Synod reaffirm the desirability of the formulation of doctrinal
statements which clearly set forth the teachings of the Holy Scriptures and
apply them to issues of our day; and be it further
Resolved, That the Synod clearly state that such doctrinal formulations
are subordinate to the Lutheran Confessions; and be it further
Resolved,
That the Synod distinguish between resolutions concerning doctrine formulated
and adopted at a convention and more formal statements of belief which are
produced by officially authorized groups, and which are then presented to the
congregations and clergy of the Synod for study and discussion, and which are
subsequently adopted by a synodical convention; and
be it further
Resolved, That the Synod reaffirm the resolutions of recent
conventions that the Synod “honor and uphold
the synodically adopted statements as valid
interpretations of Christian doctrine” (1969 Proceedings, p. 91); and be
it finally
Resolved,
That in the case of the aforementioned more formal and comprehensive statements
of belief that the Synod declare
(1)
its position that
these statements, together with all other formulations of doctrine, derive
their authority from the Word of God which they set forth from the Holy
Scriptures;
(2)
its insistence that the
ministry of the church regard these formulations with special seriousness and
that those who disagree with these formulations in part or in whole be held to
present their objections to them formally to those officials whom the Synod has
given the immediate supervision of their doctrine;
(3)
its conviction that as a
result of joint study of the Word of God the Holy Spirit will lead the Synod
into all truth, that possible errors in the aforementioned statements will be
discovered and corrected, that instances of failure to submit to the clear
teaching of the Holy Scriptures will be evangelically dealt with on an
individual pastoral basis, and that the Synod can speak with a voice that is
Scriptural, Gospeloriented, truly Lutheran, and that
we will continue to “walk together” as a true Synod.
Accordingly,
the following resolution is herewith submitted.
Whereas, A
Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles, issued by the President of
The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod in consultation with the vicepresidents of the Synod, 3 March 1972, addresses itself
to the doctrinal issues troubling the church today; and
Whereas, A
Statement presents what the Synod throughout its history has confessed and
taught on these issues, as witnessed to by synodical
statements, catechetical expositions, and convention resolutions; and
Whereas, A
Statement is, therefore, neither a new standard of orthodoxy nor a document
“based on private writings, but on such books as have been composed,
approved, and received in the name of the churches which pledge themselves to
one doctrine and religion” (FC, SD, Comp. Summary, paragraph 2); and
Whereas,
The Synod’s Commission on Theology and Church Relations has evaluated A
Statement as follows:
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 also 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 official doctrinal statements of the Synod [Adopted 3 November 1972]; and
Whereas, A
Statement, in its entirety, has been presented to the congregations and clergy
of the Synod, and during the past 16 months has been studied and discussed
throughout the church, and has been approved by various synodical
boards (Board of Control, Springfield; Board for Higher Education) and
congregations; and
Whereas,
The Lutheran church in the past, when confronted with doctrinal controversy and
crisis, has accepted expressions of belief which are in agreement with
Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions, e.g., the Thirteen Theses of Doctor
Walther, 1881; therefore be it
Resolved,
That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod declare
A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles, in all its parts, to be
Scriptural and in accord with the Lutheran Confessions, and therefore a
formulation which derives its authority from the Word of God and which
expresses the Synod’s position on current doctrinal issues; and be it
further
Resolved,
That The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod declare A Statement of Scriptural
and Confessional Principles to be a “more formal and comprehensive
statement of belief” in the sense of Resolution 524 of the 1971 Milwaukee
convention, and that the Synod further declare that A Statement shall hold the
status defined in said resolution (Preamble, above).