Book of Concord-itis

A friend asked me this weekend what new was going on the LCMS, at least what was new in the last six months or so. I didn't have much to report. There was a Walther Conference last week or so, and some have blogged about that. Matthew Harrison released a paper calling for a movement to address our problems within the LCMS via a "Formula of Concord" procedure, and there was much debating about if it would work and if it did, should it be an addendum to the Book of Concord. Consensus on that issue was a pretty solid "no," as it would be parochial and even further fragment Lutheranism.

It begs a question, however, as to why Lutheranism is so badly fragmented anyway. What are out beefs with the ELCA? Higher criticism: not addressed explicitly in the confessions. Womyn Pastors: not addressed explicitly in the confessions. Their stance and acceptance of other issues such as homosexuality and abortion have further distanced us from them, as well as their unions with the Reformed and the Episcopalians. Similar differences would describe our relations with the other churches of the Lutheran World Federation.

What are our differences with WELS? Prayer fellowship: not addressed in the confessions. Church and Ministry: addressed, but not in a way to mandate certain arrangements, and what it does recommend neither of us do anyway (such as retaining Bishops and the other orders). What else?

Now we can argue all we wish about how faithful these other groups are to the Confessions, and they can certainly argue back, but we must admit that the Book of Concord has not ensured unity among the Lutherans as its intent was. There are controverted issues that the confessors did not anticipate or wish to address.

Members of the LWF might argue that where the Confessions are silent, then we are free to teach and practice what we wish.

Members of the LCMS might argue that we apply not only the doctrinal statements of the Confessions, but also their spirit and implications to our teaching and practice.

Both groups hedge and fudge and "nuance" their understandings of the Confessions. Recently I heard someone arguing the obtuse issue that we subscribe only to the doctrine of the confessions, and not every word or the exegesis of certain texts. That lets us off the hook for having to confess the ever-virginity of Mary. The other bit of back-peddaling we do is to say that "descriptive statements" applied to Lutherans then but not to us; therefore we are justified in "abandoning the mass" and inventing new ways of worship even though the Augustana describes that the early Reformers hadn't.

Men and women smarter than I may find fault with these brief statements. Perhaps this assement is unrefined, plodding. Regardless, it seems clear that all Lutheran Church bodies are in crisis. We have this strange relationship with Confessional statements written 500 years ago, statements which we all neglect in various ways, and to which we have added confessions and doctrinal statements, officially or not.