THE MOST SIGNIFICANT RESOLUTION

3-09 — 1973 — 2010

LCMS Convention: A Good Start Toward Calling for a Halt to the LCMS Becoming One More “Anything Goes Church” and Leading a 21st Century Reformation 500 Years after Luther’s Reformation

A major portion of the time at the costly July 10-17 convention of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod’s Convention in Houston, Texas was spent on restructuring. What was the most significant resolution and action taken at the convention? Was it the overwhelming election of conservatives to the key positions? (p. 18)

A case can be made for the adoption of the unheralded Omnibus B at the closing moments of the convention for being the most significant. When an effort was made to have the convention give separate attention to one of the overtures covered by Omnibus B, LCMS President Jerry Kieschnick said it would be best to leave Omnibus B just as it was in Today’s Business. According to Kieschnick, Omnibus B showed that the LCMS still affirms the positions it took at previous conventions. This meant that when the convention adopted Omnibus B it still showed that the LCMS stands behind Resolution 3-09 of the 1973 convention, one of the previous convention resolutions listed in Omnibus B.

3-09 was adopted at the height of the LCMS’s great “Battle for the Bible.” Hundreds of liberals at the 1973 convention demonstrated against it and “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles” adopted at the convention. Most of the “Bible believers” in the major U.S. denominations lost their “Battle for the Bible.” They left their denominations, lost their seminaries and colleges and formed “splinter” groups. The 1973 LCMS convention, at least for some years, halted the LCMS from going down the road of becoming just one more of America’s anything goes churches.

The “Bible believers” in the LCMS kept their seminaries. The honest liberals left the LCMS and formed their own seminary and denomination. More than 100,000 left with 45 out of 50 professors and staff members of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, much of the mission department and some 450 seminary students.

CN has published 3-09 several times. It is in Crisis in Christendom-Seminex Ablaze, sent to all delegates to the LCMS 2004 Convention, together with Faithful to Our Calling – Faithful to Our Lord, the statement of the liberal majority at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis condemned as false doctrine in 3-09.

“LCMS Presidents Preus, Bohlmann, Barry, Kieschnick – WHY THE MESS? DID NOT FOLLOW RESOLUTION 3-09” an editorial in the June 7, 2010 Christian News, concluded:“The LCMS is in the sad condition it is today, going down the road of becoming just one more of America’s ‘anything goes’ churches to a large extent because Preus, Bohlmann, Barry and Keischnick did not follow through on 3-09.

“Both LCMS seminaries now ignore 3-09. When asked if today they still agree with resolution 3-09 of the LCMS’s 1973 convention that the theology of those who formed Seminex is false doctrine which should not be tolerated in the LCMS, they do not respond. Most seminarians are not told anything about what was one of the most significant resolutions adopted by any denomination in the 20th Century.”

3-09 was published in the July 19, 2010 Christian News. Hopefully, CN’s readers will take the time to give it careful study and find out why it has been referred to as the LCMS’s most significant resolution. It is much more important and significant than any of the resolutions adopted at the LCMS’s 2010 convention.

3-09 Reaffirmation in 2010

It was in effect reaffirmed as still binding at the recent convention of the LCMS in Houston in

Omnibus Resolution B.

The chief author of 3-09 told CN that his committee found the 850 page Christian Handbook on Vital Issues extremely helpful in getting the resolution adopted. CN sent this book to all of the 1972 convention delegates. It included “Faithful to Our Calling – Faithful to Our Lord” by the faculty of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis and other documents showing delegates just what the liberal professors were teaching. Week after week, for several months prior to the convention CN attempted to persuade delegates that the time had come for the LCMS to take a public stand vs. the destructive notions of higher criticism being promoted at Concordia Seminary: Gospel reductionism, a denial of the historicity of Genesis, undermining the third use of the law, the vicarious satisfaction of Christ, the immortality of the soul, direct messianic prophecy and even the objective nature of truth and doctrine. CN embarked on a massive education program to have an informed convention.

Council of Presidents

3-09 shows that the Council of Presidents majority actually sided with the liberals at the seminary. The liberals despised “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles” issued in March 1972, published in Christian News and affirmed by the 1973 convention. 3-09 says: “It should be noted that, while the Council of Presidents declined to commit itself on A Statement, and the faculty had already branded it as not only ‘unnecessary’ and ‘improper’ but also as ‘inadequate theologically,’ ‘alien to Lutheran theology,’ and ‘divisive,’ the response from a grateful church was positive. It was viewed as an urgently needed response which addressed the issues by reaffirming on the one hand the disputed truths on the basis of the Word of God and which, in true Lutheran fashion, including antitheses, clearly rejected the new errors circulating in the church, especially such as had gained some currency among given faculty members.”

Third Use of the Law

3-09 noted that the faculty was undermining the third use of the law. It says that “a new, un-Lutheran, un-scriptural theology is present in the faculty stance.” Commenting on the use of the historical critical methodology being used at the seminary, 3-09 says: “The fact that Scriptures inerrancy, verbal inspiration, absolutely unique as divine character are also attacked – ever so subtly at first – simply fits the tragic picture of what has gone on elsewhere in the Christian world.”

During the Concordia Seminary vs. Herman Otten case, Otten showed that Professor Richard R. Caemmerer, praised at the 2009 Ft. Wayne Seminary Symposia, undermined the vicarious satisfaction of Christ. 3-09 says:“Is must be pointed out that throughout Faithful. . . I, in spite of the emphasis on ‘Gospel,’ there is only a subdued reference to Gospel expressed in terms of the forgiveness of sins, in fact, total avoidance, in term and concept, of vicarious satisfaction, substitutionary atonement, imputation of Christ’s righteousness (1 John 1:7: ‘The blood of Jesus Christ, His Son, cleanses us from all sins’), and the hope of eternal life in heaven. In its place there appears rather a strong emphasis upon what at best can be described as a lateral-moving sort of ‘Gospel’ that seeks for ‘the liberation of human beings from all evils’ and waits to be instructed by ‘the thought patterns of every culture’ (cp. Faithful . . . I, 32, 20, 24). With this there is a definite, studied avoidance of Christ’s avowal concerning the Old Testament Scriptures that ‘they are they which testify of Me’ (John 5:39).”

What Otten (now CN editor) and his chief counselor, Kurt Marquart, in the Seminary vs. Otten case, told seminary administrators and the top leader of the LCMS was being taught at the seminary 15 years later was affirmed as fact by the LCMS’s 1973 convention in Resolution 3-09.

Marquart noted that Alvin Wagner, a member of the LCMS’s CTCR, read a letter from Herman Sasse at a testimonial banquet in Chicago for Christian News attended by some 850. Sasse, one of the leading Lutheran theologians of the 20th Century, wrote: “Somebody should rise and publicly thank Herman Otten for his brave fight,” “ Why was it left to a young pastor to speak where others should have spoken?”

The banquet was held after LCMS President Preus and the LCMS’s Council of Presidents unanimously repudiated Christian News. Liberals on the COP blamed CN for the defeat of LCMS President Oliver Harms and election of Preus.

Otten and Marquart warned against a move at the seminary to separate fact from meaning. The very historical facts upon which Christianity is founded were being undermined. The distinction between “historie” and “Geschichte” was being made, the realm of the noumena and realm of phenomena. Adam and Eve existed in the realm of “Geschichte” (myth, stories not necessarily based on fact) but not in the realm of historie (ordinary calendar history, such as Washington crossing the Delaware in 1776)

Existentialistic Theology

3-09 says:“Existentialistic theology (freedom to achieve self-understanding and authentic existence by internalizing of personal religious experience) has severely undercut the content of Christian faith in our day. It is with considerable apprehension, therefore, that note must be taken of the faculty’s emphasis on the ‘meaning’ of a given Biblical episode rather than on both the fact and its meaning together (cp. Faithful. . . I, 17, 91, 3, 25, 26, 37). There is no possible way of protecting the Gospel, once the fact is separated from the meaning. Both must stand, or the Gospel is destroyed.”

Denial of Historical Events

3-09 of the 1973 LCMS convention says:“These three areas of concern are sufficient to demonstrate that the theological, doctrinal stance of the faculty is at variance with our Synod’s teaching. Other specific points of deviation could be listed (e.g., the eroding of the doctrine of original sin by a de facto denial of the historical events on which this doctrine is based), but these have already been accounted for in the President’s A Statement and the Fact Finding Committee’s ‘Report.’ The validity of this charge, that another theology has intruded into our Synod through the faculty majority’s stance, is borne out by their own documents, which corroborate and underscore the specific points at variance.”

“. . . the faculty itself has opted for neo-Lutheran theological stance which allows historical-critical methodology to dictate given judgments, both against Scripture and also against the Confessions.”

The 1973 LCMS convention in 3-09 said: “The theological stance of the faculty majority of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, has been shown to be in violation of Article II of the Synod’s Constitution.”

The lengthy resolution concluded:“Resolved, That the Synod repudiate its attitude toward Holy Scripture, particularly as regards its authority and clarity, which reduces to theological opinion or exegetical questions matters which are in fact clearly taught in Scripture (e.g., facticity of miracle accounts and their details; historicity of Adam and Eve as real persons; the fall of Adam and Eve into sin as a real event, to which original sin and its imputation upon all succeeding generations of mankind must be traced; the historicity of every detail in the life of Jesus as recorded by the evangelists; predictive prophecies in the Old Testament which are in fact Messianic; the doctrine of angels; the Jonah account, etc.; and be it further

“Resolved, That the Synod recognize that the matters referred to in the second resolved are in fact false doctrine running counter to the holy Scriptures, the Lutheran Confessions, and the synodical stance and for that reason “cannot be tolerated in the church of God, much less be excused and defended” (FC, SD, Preface, 9); . . .”

Protesting 3-09

Hundreds of convention delegates vigorously protested against 3-09 and the adoption of “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles.” The July 19 CN has some pictures of the liberals protesting. Dr. Charles Mueller, now a leader of Jesus First, was a hero of the protestors. They marched to the podium registering their protests. Some wore black arm bands. They ran Mueller for president against the choice of the conservatives. He defended the position of some at the seminary whose positions on the third use of the law was condemned in 3-09. Mueller wrote: “To this day His Gospel has conquered me. I cannot return to the life under the Law. Others find the Law compelling. I find it repulsive.”Charles Mueller defended Journey to Freedom written by Richard Hinze, his close associate and successor as president of the Southeastern District. This book attacked the inerrancy of the Bible and the anti-scriptural theology of the liberals condemned in 3-09. Mueller defended the theological position of Seminex and the district presidents who were removed for ordaining uncertified Seminex graduates.Mueller wrote in a letter to his district dated April 5, 1976:“There is no substantial area of disagreement between the position which I have maintained, and even now maintain, and that of any of the district presidents involved. There is no theological variation which separates us” The leader of the “new left” added: “At the Anaheim Convention, during the discussion of the now famous 5-02, I addressed the delegates asking that no action be taken and, together with most other district presidents, confessed the similarities of our personal positions and those of the eight.”

Council of Presidents

The LCMS’s Council of Presidents has a long history of defending supporters of those whose theology was condemned in 3-09. When the COP appointed an outspoken evolutionist, who had publicly made his position known, to the CTCR, CN wrote to each member of the COP to find out how he voted. Most refused to answer.

Following the 1973 Convention, a mass rally was held in St. Louis attended by some 1500. It was called to protest against 3-09 and the conservative action taken at the 1973 convention. Rev. Walter Schoedel led the rally. It was packed. Many sat on the floor right under the podium. Almost all the speakers defended John Tietjen and the liberal profs condemned in 3-09.

When the LCMS officials elected in 1973 were installed, some liberal seminary professors, who later formed Seminex, marched behind a banner protesting 3-09.

Now Charles Mueller and Walter Schoedel are invited to speak at the seminary which has banned the CN editor. Those who protested 3-09 are welcome and those who championed 3-09 are not.

In 2006 a panel of the COP ruled that Charles Mueller, a leader of the forces, which opposed 3-09, has always been a confessional Lutheran while Otten is an impenitent sinner for publishing an article opposing Jesus First. It said that Jesus First leader Charles Mueller wants the LCMS to be broad enough to include on its clergy roster those who want the LCMS to have women pastors and defend the theology of Seminex. LCMS President Jerry Kieschnick publicized the COP ruling declaring that Jesus First leader Charles Mueller has always been orthodox and the editor an impenitent sinner for questioning the theological position of an opponent of 3-09 who wants such resolutions as 3-09 to have a “term limitation”. The editor’s congregation was suspended by a COP member influenced by Kieschnick. Another COP member told the editor in November, 2009 that his congregaton is currently under the threat of expulsion because it has not removed its pastor for sinning and breaking the Eighth Commandment against Jesus First leader and 3-09 opponent Charles Mueller.

It was an 8 page pamphlet from Charles Mueller’s congregation sent to all LCMS churches in 2000 which helped put Kieschnick on the ballot for president in 2001 and on the road to eventual victory. It did not concern the COP that the pamphlet broke the Eighth Commandment vs. LCMS President A.L. Barry. Neither Mueller’s church nor Kieschnick would answer the question asking whether Kieschnick had anything to do with getting the CN’s editor suspended from the LCMS and now under the threat of expulsion. None of the organized conservatives and many bloggers protested against the suspension. “Otten got what he deserved from the COP” was teh general attitude.

Omnibus Resolution B of the 2010 convention made it clear that there is still no term limitation to 3-09. Now will 3-09 finally be implemented? How much longer will supporters of women pastors, evolution and the theology of Seminex be allowed to remain on the LCMS clergy roster? Will the LCMS continue on the road toward becoming just one more of America’s “anything goes churches.” The 2010 convention of the LCMS made a good start toward calling a halt to becoming an “anything goes” church. Many delegates spoke like the courageous confessional Lutherans who supported 3-09 of the 1973 convention.

The evidence continues to mount that there are professors in the Concordia University System who do not oppose evolution and who reject the historicity of the Genesis account of creation, views condemned in 3-09 as false doctrine not to be tolerated in the LCMS. Some students who attended one of the schools in the Concordia University system a few days ago told CN that hardly any of their professors oppose evolution and that some champion evolution outright. Of course the new leaders of the LCMS must be given some time. They can’t be expected to act like a bull in a China shop. Hopefully 3-09 will finally be implemented. If those who want the LCMS to be open to women pastors and evolution continue to promote their position, they should be given a fair and open hearing. If they refuse to retract, then 3-09 should be followed. There should be no room on the LCMS clergy roster for those who reject “A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles” adopted in 1973.

Decades ago Newsweek noted that the CN editor was calling for some “heresy trials.” It sounds like a terrible term, but that is what the LCMS needs today if the liberals do not peacefully separate from the LCMS as the open letter to the “40” Jesus First and DayStar liberals in the July 19 CN suggested. It will only take a few. Start with an outspoken defender of women pastors and evolution as Dr. Matthew Becker. Once the precedent is established in the LCMS that 3-09 is being implemented many of the liberals will get the message, retreat or peacefully divide.

The LCMS’s 2010 Convention made a good start for a halt to the march for the LCMS becoming just one more of America’s anything goes churches. It made a good start for the LCMS to become an international leader at the 500th anniversary of the Reformation on October 31, 2010 for a 21st Century Reformation and Formula of Concord by indicating that there are no term limitations to 3-09 of the LCMS’s 1973 convention. Read 3-09 in the July 19 Christian News.