Resolution 5-05 lists numerous resolutions supporting closed communion passed in previous conventions, several of which refer to the 1999 CTCR document, “Admission to the Lord's Supper”, as well as 2013 Res. 4-10, which states,
“The practice of inviting all baptized believers who merely affirm the real presence while neglecting to address the necessity of unity of confession, is not consistent with the biblical and confessional position of the Synod”
Yet despite all that, Res. 5-05 tapdances around the practice of open communion for pre-confirmation children.
This is an interesting, forthright YouTube presentation of the historical development of 'Confirmation' in the Church, pre-Luther and to our current Lutheran practices. Also addressed in the ACELC conference video of Rev. Dr. Mark Surburg, is use of our Agenda's rite of First Communion apart from the Rite of Confirmation; explained therein is the priority of appropriate inculcation of youth in the Small Catechism, with specific focus on the Sacrament of Holy Communion, over the Rites.
Thanks for laying out key points of these resolutions and other contests on the agenda.
On 5–08A, and touching on 5–09A, just an example demonstrating how the LCMS left doesn’t necessarily have to become a majority in order to effect considerable damage throughout the church body. Consider a scenario where a former district president is the interim Pastor in a good-sized congregation with a senior pastor vacancy. The former district president convinces the call committee and a majority of the voting members that since the congregational bylaws allow for a female to conceivably hold the President of the congregation office (even though a female has never been elected to that position in the congregation), it is necessary to eliminate from consideration any candidate for a call that would not be open to a female being president of the congregation. He also warns the congregation that both Seminaries have moved towards cutting women out of any meaningful participation in the church, including voting. So, he lays the groundwork, and the litmus test for calling the next senior pastor of the congregation becomes primarily whether they are open to women holding the president of the congregation office and reading scripture in worship. That effectively eliminates most or all confessional candidates from consideration by the call committee. This is exactly what has happened in a congregation recently. Is this a despicable, political tactic? Yes. But, this is an example of how the left operates, how they influence, and how they maintain control of many significant institutions.
I would also note regarding 5–05 that encouraging pastors to receive the admonition of their ecclesiastical supervisors where communion practice has been indiscriminate sounds great, but in multiple districts where the district president is at the very least tolerant of open communion practices, and more realistically, very much in favor of them, the only ecclesiastical supervisors from which any admonition would come would be the Synod President admonishing the district President, and we all know how unlikely and infrequent that is.
This afternoon, after Resolution 5-05 - To Address Open Communion and Pastoral Exceptions in Extraordinary Circumstances was presented, an amendment was made and seconded that would have a Resolved state, in part, that Synod pastors, "in accordance with the standards set forth in Article II and Article VI.2 of the Synod's Constitution" teach, exhort, practice, and defend closed Communion.
The LCMS Convention voted by 57% to 43% to reject requiring Synod pastors from practicing closed communion in accordance with Article II and Article VI.2 of the Synod's Constitution. The Convention's vote essentially makes a mockery of Article VI.1 of the Synod's Constitution.
Res. 5-05 was then voted on and easily passed (87% to 13%), thus making it, another of, as Ad Crucem News noted elsewhere, "so many anodyne resolutions".
Resolution 5-05 lists numerous resolutions supporting closed communion passed in previous conventions, several of which refer to the 1999 CTCR document, “Admission to the Lord's Supper”, as well as 2013 Res. 4-10, which states,
“The practice of inviting all baptized believers who merely affirm the real presence while neglecting to address the necessity of unity of confession, is not consistent with the biblical and confessional position of the Synod”
Yet despite all that, Res. 5-05 tapdances around the practice of open communion for pre-confirmation children.
This is an interesting, forthright YouTube presentation of the historical development of 'Confirmation' in the Church, pre-Luther and to our current Lutheran practices. Also addressed in the ACELC conference video of Rev. Dr. Mark Surburg, is use of our Agenda's rite of First Communion apart from the Rite of Confirmation; explained therein is the priority of appropriate inculcation of youth in the Small Catechism, with specific focus on the Sacrament of Holy Communion, over the Rites.
https://youtu.be/BSdY-PWAJFQ?is=JIPAVe-KmGDnKAsZ
Thanks for laying out key points of these resolutions and other contests on the agenda.
On 5–08A, and touching on 5–09A, just an example demonstrating how the LCMS left doesn’t necessarily have to become a majority in order to effect considerable damage throughout the church body. Consider a scenario where a former district president is the interim Pastor in a good-sized congregation with a senior pastor vacancy. The former district president convinces the call committee and a majority of the voting members that since the congregational bylaws allow for a female to conceivably hold the President of the congregation office (even though a female has never been elected to that position in the congregation), it is necessary to eliminate from consideration any candidate for a call that would not be open to a female being president of the congregation. He also warns the congregation that both Seminaries have moved towards cutting women out of any meaningful participation in the church, including voting. So, he lays the groundwork, and the litmus test for calling the next senior pastor of the congregation becomes primarily whether they are open to women holding the president of the congregation office and reading scripture in worship. That effectively eliminates most or all confessional candidates from consideration by the call committee. This is exactly what has happened in a congregation recently. Is this a despicable, political tactic? Yes. But, this is an example of how the left operates, how they influence, and how they maintain control of many significant institutions.
I would also note regarding 5–05 that encouraging pastors to receive the admonition of their ecclesiastical supervisors where communion practice has been indiscriminate sounds great, but in multiple districts where the district president is at the very least tolerant of open communion practices, and more realistically, very much in favor of them, the only ecclesiastical supervisors from which any admonition would come would be the Synod President admonishing the district President, and we all know how unlikely and infrequent that is.
This afternoon, after Resolution 5-05 - To Address Open Communion and Pastoral Exceptions in Extraordinary Circumstances was presented, an amendment was made and seconded that would have a Resolved state, in part, that Synod pastors, "in accordance with the standards set forth in Article II and Article VI.2 of the Synod's Constitution" teach, exhort, practice, and defend closed Communion.
The LCMS Convention voted by 57% to 43% to reject requiring Synod pastors from practicing closed communion in accordance with Article II and Article VI.2 of the Synod's Constitution. The Convention's vote essentially makes a mockery of Article VI.1 of the Synod's Constitution.
Res. 5-05 was then voted on and easily passed (87% to 13%), thus making it, another of, as Ad Crucem News noted elsewhere, "so many anodyne resolutions".