From: Jack Cascione <pastorcascione@juno.com>
To: reclaimnews@reclaimingwalther.org <reclaimnews@reclaimingwalther.org>
Subject: ReclaimNews: Response to the  CTCR Chairman on Doctrinal Unity
Date: Thursday, May 13, 1999 9:05 PM

* * * * *          R E C L A I M   N E W S          * * * * *
=============================================================
Please Forward and or Post.

Two Items on this News Release:

1.  The Texas District President, CTCR Chairman, and candidate for LCMS Synodical President,  Dr. Jerry Kieschnick, reprinted his interpretation of doctrinal unity in the LCMS in the April issue of the Texas Lutheran Messenger.  This man may be your next Synodical President.

2. This is a critical review of Dr. Kieshnick's critical review of doctrinal unity in the LCMS.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------

THOUGHTS FROM PRESIDENT KIESCHNICK  -  TEXAS MESSENGER  APRIL 1999

Critical issues facing The Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod:  Doctrinal unity
	by Dr. Jerry Kieschnick, President, LCMS Texas District

(This is the ninth in a series of 10 articles on Critical Issues Facing The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod as they appeared in an article by Dr. Kieschnick in The Lutheran Witness in 1998.)
 
Doctrinal Unity-
Will the source of our doctrinal unity be an increased reliance on tradition, heritage and convention resolutions or an unequivocal insistence upon clear passages of Scripture and Scripture alone for such unity?

“Doctrine” is defined as “a particular principle taught or advocated; a body or system of teachings relating to a particular subject; tenet, dogma, theory, precept, belief.”

The word “doctrine” is a household word in The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, referring to those articles of belief drawn from the Scriptures, those beliefs we hold near and dear to our hearts.

Doctrinal unity also is a term near and dear to our hearts.  It is a term indicating that we in the LCMS are unified in our doctrine, that we all believe, teach and confess the same doctrine or body of beliefs.

A concern being expressed by many in our Synod today is that there seems to be confusion regarding the basis on which our doctrinal unity exists. 
Some say that, to be unified in doctrine, all members of the Synod must agree to and uphold all doctrinal resolutions and statements adopted by the Synod in convention.  Others believe that our doctrinal unity consists only in our agreement with and subscription to Scripture and the Confessions, as indicated in Article II of the LCMS Constitution:

	Article II:  Confession
The Synod, and every member of the Synod, accepts without reservation:
	1.  The Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament as the written Word of God and the only rule and norm of faith and of practice;
	2.  All the symbolical books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church as a true and unadulterated statement and exposition of the Word of God, to wit:  the three ecumenical creeds (the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, the Athanasian Creed), the Unaltered Augsburg Confession, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, the Smalcald Articles, the Large Catechism of Luther, the Small Catechism of Luther, and the Formula of Concord.

Interestingly, nowhere in the Synod’s constitution or bylaws is there a statement of equal force or strength concerning what we believe, teach and confess.  The constitution and bylaws do contain references to other conditions of membership in the Synod.  They also contain references to
doctrinal resolutions and statements of the Synod, the commission on doctrinal review and the duties of doctrinal reviewers.

The important statement in regard to doctrinal review is in Bylaw 11:01: 

	b.  the prime concern of doctrinal review is that the doctrine set forth be in accord with the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions.

No reference is made in this bylaw to doctrinal resolutions or statements, only to Scripture and the Confessions.

A later bylaw (11:07) states:
	d.  The reviewer shall further be concerned that resolutions of the Synod be honored and upheld and that positions deviating from the doctrinal resolutions of the Synod be clearly identified as such.

Note the words “concerned” and “identified,” in reference to synodical resolutions.  Quite different from “accepts without reservation,” in reference to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.

But what about the relationship between the Holy Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions?  From which of these sources comes LCMS doctrine?  Members of the Synod, as we have already seen, pledge “acceptance without reservation” to both.  But from which one is our doctrine actually derived?

The answer to this question is a critical issue in our Synod today.  I believe the answer is quite clear.  The statement in Article II is that we accept without reservation “The Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament as the written Word of God and the only rule and norm of faith and of practice.”  (underlining and bolding mine).  

It is from the Scripture and from Scripture alone that our doctrine is drawn.

Martin Luther himself was asked by the Catholic church to recant or withdraw his beliefs.  Which beliefs was he to denounce?  Primarily those having to do with the source of God’s grace, God’s forgiveness and God’s eternal salvation.  Foremost among his beliefs was his discovery of Eph.
2:8-9”
	“For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith--and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God--not by works, so that no one can boast.”

Do you remember what he said when asked to repudiate the books he had written and the beliefs they contained?  He said: 
“Unless I am convicted by Scripture and plain reason--I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other--my conscience is captive to the Word of God.  I cannot and I will not recant anything, for to go against conscience is neither right nor safe.  God help me.  Amen.”

That courageous statement of Luther’s catalyzed the Reformation, leading ultimately to the formation of what is now known as the Lutheran church.

And what is so significant and so distinctive about the Lutheran church? 
Our belief--
· that we are saved by God’s grace alone, without any merit or worthiness within us;
· that our salvation comes by faith alone, itself a gift of God’s grace;
· that the truths of salvation  by God’s grace, through faith, are contained in and communicated through Scripture alone, the only rule and norm of faith and of practice.
 
Where does that leave us in the question concerning our doctrinal unity? Squarely where we belong--standing firmly on the testimony of Scripture and Scripture alone!

Our forefathers had it right!  They understood the changing and fallible nature of synodical resolutions, as important as they may be.  But they also understood the unchanging and infallible nature of the Scriptures themselves.  This understanding is expressed in a very important Article
of our Constitution: 

	Article VII:  Relation of the Synod to Its Members
In its relation to its members, the Synod is not an ecclesiastical government exercising legislative or coercive powers, and with respect to the individual congregation’s right of self-government it is but an advisory body.  Accordingly, no resolution of the Synod imposing anything upon the individual congregation is of binding force if it is not in accordance with the Word of God or if it appears to be inexpedient as far as the condition of a congregation is concerned.

May God richly bless the LCMS, including the Texas District, as we constantly strive to achieve and maintain doctrinal unity on the basis of Scripture and Scripture alone!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------

A Critical Review of The Texas District President’s 
Critical Review of LCMS Doctrinal Unity
By Rev. Jack Cascione

 The April 1999 issue of the Texas Messenger contained an article titled, “Critical Issues facing The Lutheran Church -Missouri Synod: Doctrinal Unity.”  This article was reprinted  from an earlier article that appeared in the 1998 Lutheran Witness.

The article is now more significant to the entire Synod because Texas President Kieschnick is now the chairman of the CTCR, the Synod’s Commission on Theology and Church Relations.  President Kieschnick was a candidate for the LCMS Presidency in 1998 and will most likely be a more formidable candidate in 2001.

President Kieschnick begins by recommending that LCMS doctrinal unity be based on Scripture not convention resolutions.  Yes, everything in the LCMS should be based on Scripture, but President Kieschnick does not tell us which convention resolutions are not based on Scripture. 

President Kieschnick then makes a second attempt to show a discrepancy between the Synod’s convention resolutions and Article II on Confession of Faith from the LCMS Constitution.  He reasons that nothing in the LCMS Constitution requires that we accept any LCMS resolution without reservation.  He writes, “Note the words  ‘concerned’ and ‘identified,’ in reference to synodical resolutions.  Quite different from ‘accepts without reservation,’ in reference to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.”  One could now ask, what is the use of convention
resolutions or, for that matter, the LCMS Convention if their resolutions are nothing more than a suggestions or opinions?

After finding or at least implying a doctrinal variance between the content of the Synod’s convention resolutions, Kieschnick then asks if the Bible or the Lutheran Confessions are the source of Lutheran doctrine.  He writes, “From which of these sources comes LCMS doctrine?” 
He then concludes that our Scriptures are the only source of LCMS doctrine.  

Kieschnick quotes Luther’s reply at the Diet of Worms, “Unless I am convinced by Scripture and plain reason...I cannot and will not recant anything....”

Kieschnick asks and then answers, “Where does that leave us in the question concerning our doctrinal unity?  Squarely where we belong-standing firmly on the testimony of Scripture and Scripture alone!”  He then quotes all of Article VII of the LCMS Constitution which
in part states “Accordingly, no resolution of the Synod imposing anything upon the individual congregation is of binding force if it is not in accordance with the word of God....”

Kieschnick only reasons from part of Luther’s position at Worms. Luther also said he would not recant or redraw any of his books presented to the Diet because they contained Christian truths.  Which convention resolutions do not contain Christian truths?  Where are the errors?  Kieschnick leaves this question unanswered but continues to write: “Our forefathers had it right!  They understood the changing and fallible nature of synodical resolutions, as important as they may be.” 
Kieschnick wants us to believe that he and the “our forefathers” have the same opinion about synodical resolutions.

How are synodical resolutions important to President Kieschnick?  By his understanding of LCMS doctrinal unity, congregations and pastors may follow convention resolutions or disregard them as they choose.

Article II states that “...every member of Synod, accepts without reservation....All the symbolical books of the ELC as a true and unadulterated statement and exposition of the Word of God...”   Yet, Kieschnick concludes that doctrinally unity is achieved in the LCMS from the Bible alone apart from the Lutheran Confessions.  If this is true why do the clergy have to swear to the Lutheran Confessions if they are not a source of doctrine in the LCMS?

Article II says the Bible is the only rule and norm of faith and practice.  It doesn’t say the Bible is the only source, otherwise why teach the children Luther’s Small Catechism?  Why not have them simply memorize verses from the Bible?  For that matter, Luther’s name is not in the Bible.  Why do we call ourselves the “Lutheran Church”? Kieschnick should explain which parts of the Lutheran Confessions are not correct doctrine and, therefore, are not worthy to be a source of LCMS doctrine. 

Many Southern Baptists will not agree to the Creeds, let alone Luther’s Small Catechism, because they are written by men.  We know that the Bible is the source of doctrine for the Lutheran Confessions.  Haven’t we also agreed that the Lutheran Confessions are a source of doctrine because they are correct exposition of Scripture?

President Kieschnick skips from Article II to Article VII in the LCMS Constitution.  What about Articles III through VI, and Article XIII?  In Article VI Conditions of Membership, we find under point 1. that membership in the Synod is based on agreement with Article II.  Point 2 says that membership in the Synod includes “renunciation of unionism...such as participation in heterodox tract and missionary activities.”  Point 4 says that membership in the Synod means  “exclusive
use of doctrinally pure agenda, hymn books, and catechisms in church and school.” 

Currently, there are congregations in the Texas District that belong to the Willow Creek Association, including the Texas District Office.  There are also congregations that don’t follow point VI. 4 above, such as Concordia San Antonio, Prince of Peace, Carrollton, Salem Lutheran,
Tomball, and more.  According to points VI. 2 above, these congregations in Texas should be removed from the LCMS for membership in the Willow Creek Association, including the Texas District Office.

Kieschnick also could have mentioned Article XIII Expulsion.  Yes, according to article VII congregations are at liberty to disregard synodical resolutions.  The Convention is also at liberty to remove the Texas District from LCMS membership for disregarding Articles II and VI.

The 1998 LCMS Convention deliberated and voted on resolutions intending to remove and/or discipline district presidents and an entire district if they did not cease desist their violations of articles II and VI.  These are resolutions that Kieschnick may want to disregard in favor of
following Scripture alone.

Kieschnick redefines the parameters of doctrinal unity in such broad terms, that from his understanding, the LCMS Convention operates with the doctrinal unity of the Southern Baptist Convention.  You know, “We allbelieve in the Bible.” 

One would have hoped that when speaking of doctrinal unity the Chairman of the CTCR would have encouraged all congregations and pastors to follow doctrinally correct convention resolutions.

Francis Pieper quotes Walther on page 165, vol. 1. of Christian Dogmatics, “As long as men denied that we were true Lutherans, we were obliged to appeal constantly to our precious  Confessions and the old faithful teachers of our Church as our witnesses.”

=============================================================
For more information, make sure to visit our website at:
http://www.reclaimingwalther.org.  If you're not currently a
Reclaim News mailing list member or want more information on us and
you don't have Internet access, you can email our mail server.  Just
send an email to <majordomo@reclaimingwalther.org> with the subject
line blank and the message consisting of the two words:
info reclaimnews

Be sure to route this email message to all concerned friends, family,
and fellow church members who need to learn about the current state
of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod.

If you wish to remove your name from this mailing list, send an email
to <majordomo@reclaimingwalther.org>.  Leave the subject line blank
and place the following two words in the message section:
unsubscribe reclaimnews

To contact the administrator/moderator of this mailing list, send an
email to Rev. Jack Cascione at <pastorcascione@juno.com>.  Any questions
of a technical nature, contact <list-owner@reclaimingwalther.org>.