A Response from the ELS Presidium to Circuit #8

Concerning the Circuit’s

Memorial to the 2005 Convention

 

October 11, 2005

 

Our 2005 convention passed the following resolution: “BE IT RESOLVED, That the Circuit #8 Revision of ‘The Public Ministry of the Word’ be referred to the presidium, in consultation with the PCM, for a written response as to the where, how and why the revision is not in order” (2005 Synod Report, p. 72).

 

The following represents the response of President Moldstad and Vice President Obenberger to the congregations in the northern Minnesota circuit, Circuit #8. On September 21, 2005, the six-member Presidium’s Committee on Ministry (PCM) met in Apple Valley, MN, and offered its advice to the presidium.

 

In order to focus on the major areas of disagreement and to point out what is not in keeping with sound doctrine (1 Timothy 6:3; Titus 1:9), only substantive differences in the two documents (the synodically adopted statement and the proposed revision) will here be entertained. Although called a “revision,” the document submitted by Circuit #8 is not merely a revision but a substantive change in doctrine resulting in a different document than the adopted statement, “The Public Ministry of the Word.” [The memorial containing the revision document can be found in the 2005 Synod Report, pp. 139-143.]

1)    The revision document omits certain phrases under the subject of the Office of the Keys. The forgiving of sins “on behalf of Christ” and also the retaining of sins by individual Christians are omitted.

 

The synod’s adopted statement reads:

The keys are used privately or unofficially when individual Christians, on behalf of Christ, speak the Gospel of forgiveness to others; when they forgive the sins of those who sin against them; when they retain the sins of those who do not repent, e.g., when they confront in a brotherly way those who need to repent of their sins; and when in “the mutual consolation and conversation of the brethren” they comfort one another with the words of the Gospel. [bold emphasis added]

 

The revision document of Circuit #8 reads:

Individual Christians also speak the Gospel of forgiveness to others, forgive the sins of those who sin against them, confront in a brotherly way those who need to repent of their sins, and in “the mutual conversation and consolation of the brethren” comfort one another with the words of the Gospel. This may be called the private or unofficial use of the keys.

 

In the revision document individual Christians are said to forgive the sins of those who sin against them but are not said to forgive sins in general and on behalf of Christ; nor are they said to retain sins. It is true that individual Christians in the realm of the Universal Priesthood of All Believers do not exercise the keys “on behalf of the church” (an expression signifying public ministry) but they do indeed forgive and retain sins “on behalf of Christ.”

 

While the revision document makes reference to the 2001 ELS Catechism, it does not specifically state that the Office of the Keys has been “given…to every Christian.” In fact, the omitted reference to the 1980 adopted “Doctrine of the Church” statement (a reference found in “The Public Ministry of the Word”) appears to be deliberate, for it is there that the individual usage also is set forth. The synod’s “The Doctrine of the Church” statement of 1980 says: “God has given to the church (believers) the authority to preach the Gospel and administer the Sacraments. This is known as the office of the keys. Believers have the authority to exercise the keys individually and collectively. (John 20:21-23 and 1 Peter 2:9).” In our ELS Catechism we state: “Christ has given this special authority to His church, that is, to every Christian (Priesthood of All Believers).” This is found in the 2001 edition, p. 194, #306.

 

The Brief Statement of 1932 says, “Since the Christians are the Church, it is self-evident that they alone originally possess the spiritual gifts and rights which Christ has gained for, and given to, His Church…Christ Himself commits to all believers the keys of the kingdom of heaven, Matt. 16:13-19; 18:17-20; John 20:22, 23, and commissions all believers to preach the Gospel and to administer the Sacraments, Matt. 28:19, 20; 1 Cor. 11:23-25. Accordingly, we reject all doctrines by which this spiritual power or any part thereof is adjudged as originally vested in certain individuals or bodies, such as the Pope, or the bishops, or the order of the ministry, or the secular lords, or councils, or synods, etc…” [bold emphasis added]

 

Luther: “The keys belong to the whole church and to each of its members, both as regards their authority and their various uses… To bind and to loose clearly is nothing else than to proclaim and apply the gospel. For what is it to loose, if not to announce the forgiveness of sins before God? What is it to bind, except to withdraw the gospel and to declare the retention of sins? Whether they want to or not [they must concede] that the keys are an exercise of the ministry of the Word and belong to all Christians,” (pp. 27, 28 in LW 40, “Concerning the Ministry,” 1523). [bold emphasis added]

 

Luther: “Here we take our stand: There is no other Word of God than that which is given all Christians to proclaim. There is no other Baptism than the one which any Christian can bestow. There is no other remembrance of the Lord’s Supper than that which any Christian can observe and which Christ has instituted. There is no other kind of sin than that which any Christian can bind or loose,” (LW 40:34-35, “The Keys,” 1530). [bold emphasis added]

 

The omission of the Office of the Keys as being given to and utilized not only publicly by the church but also individually in the realm of the Universal Priesthood is not in accordance with sound doctrine. Furthermore, our adopted statement rejects the concept of omitting the retaining key as being used by individual Christians; the statement specifically includes the retaining of sin by the individual Christian. Already in the first step of church discipline, as described in Matthew 18:15, the use of the binding key is evident, albeit the final step of church discipline (Matthew 18:17) is issued by the church. To deny that the believers, as a whole and also individually, have not only the right but the actual power and usage of both the loosing key and the binding key is as wrong as to deny God’s institution of a pastoral/presbyteral/episcopal office of oversight.

 

To show the important distinction between the two documents, three illustrations may be of some help. Each of these illustrations finds full support in our adopted statement, “The Public Ministry of the Word.”

 

Suppose two Christian laymen are close friends. Suppose, in private and in confidence, one of them confesses a sin to the other. He is repentant and distraught over what he has done. He is troubled and trembles over a feeling of God’s wrath and a horror of God’s judgment and of hell. He deeply desires and is in need of the comfort of the Gospel. His Christian friend, knowing that forgiveness has been procured for each individual and that Christ desires this to be announced to each repentant individual, absolves and comforts him with the words, “By the authority of Christ, I declare unto you the gracious forgiveness of all your sins.” He announces this, not on behalf of the Church, but on behalf of Christ.[1] (Matthew 18:15b; 2 Corinthians 2:7)

 

Suppose two other professing laymen are neighbors. Suppose one of them is living in sin, and his neighbor becomes aware of it, although it is still hidden to the rest of the world. As a Christian brother, he privately speaks the truth in love to his erring neighbor. But the erring neighbor makes is plainly evident that while he knows that he is sinning in the eyes of God, he is not repentant, not troubled over his sin, and has no intention of changing his sinful ways. With deep love and sorrow in his heart his friend carries out the first step of church discipline, in order to call him to repentance, by stating, “I bind your sins against you.” He announces this, not on behalf of the Church, but as his individual duty to his erring neighbor. (Galatians 6:1, 2)

 

We could also picture another scenario where a female teacher in one of our Lutheran schools is dealing with a recalcitrant child. Not only may she have to speak the word of Law binding the sin, but then when repentance is expressed need to absolve the child, not only as a layperson, but in her position in the public ministry of that congregation. [Matthew 9:8 states that our Lord had given such authority to ANTHROPOIS, not males, but to mankind, including females.]

 

2)    The revision document rejects that “the divinely instituted Public Ministry of the Word includes both a narrower and a wider sense,” when the term wider refers to “offices having a limited public use of the keys.”

 

The synodically adopted statement says:

This divinely instituted Public Ministry of the Word includes both a narrower and a wider sense. The narrower sense refers to a presiding office that is indispensable for the church; see II A. The wider sense refers, in addition to a presiding office, to offices having a limited public use of the keys, offices that the church, in her freedom, may establish; see II B. [bold emphasis added]

 

Under the section labeled II. B. in “The Public Ministry of the Word,” the adopted statement further says:

 

The church has freedom[2] in dividing the labors of the public ministry (for example, vicars, principals, Lutheran elementary school teachers and other teachers), but must not go beyond the bounds of God’s commands when calling men or women to carry out a limited public use of the keys (1 Corinthians 14:34, 1 Timothy 2:12ff, etc). The extent to which one is authorized by the call of the church to exercise the keys publicly is the extent to which one is in the Public Ministry of the Word. Authorization to exercise a limited part of the Public Ministry of the Word does not imply authorization to exercise all or other parts of it (1 Corinthians 12:5, 28, Romans 12:6–8, Philippians 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:8, 5:17). [bold emphasis added]

 

On the other hand, the revision document of Circuit #8 states:

The church is free to establish offices that assist the Public Ministry of the Word and Sacraments (for example, vicars, principals, Lutheran elementary school teachers and other teachers) but must not go beyond the bounds of God’s commands when calling men and women to serve in these offices (1 Corinthians 14:34, 1 Timothy 2:12f, etc.) The church in her freedom determines the duties of such Sacred Ecclesiastical Offices. (Acts 6:1-5, Philippians 1:1, 1 Timothy 3:8). [bold emphasis added]

 

Furthermore, the revision document includes this remark within its #1 footnote:

Other Sacred Ecclesiastical Offices (see III. Below) are called the Public Ministry in a Wider Sense because they are not specifically instituted by God and they are not a necessity for the church, but they are established by the church in her Christian freedom. [bold emphasis added]

 

Comparing the two documents, one notices that no expression of Public Ministry in the sense of divine institution appears in the Circuit #8 revision when, for example, Lutheran elementary school teachers are mentioned. Instead, the revision document uses the expression “Sacred Ecclesiastical Offices” in referring, for example, to Lutheran elementary school teachers. The synod’s adopted statement contends that, because Scripture itself speaks of more offices/forms than simply that of the office of pastor, therefore the “whole” is instituted by God and that encompasses both the narrower sense and the wider sense.

 

What do passages such as 1 Corinthians 12:5 & 28, Philippians 1:1, and 1 Timothy 3:8 teach? The 1 Corinthian verses show that God has indicated teachers as one of the offices he has given to the church; the Greek term (DIDASKALOUS) used here appears wider than the expression “pastors,” especially when considered with other terms in close proximity, e.g., helpers and leaders. The passage from Philippians shows that presbyters and deacons are addressed in similar fashion as being the recipients of Paul’s letter; this implies strongly that the deacons also were spiritual helpers for the Philippian church. In I Timothy 3 we find reference made of deacons who were to be tested or examined in order to serve; this testing appears to have been of a spiritual nature (vv. 9 & 10) in light of the duties they were called to perform. The 1 Timothy 5:17 reference ascribes double honor to those laboring in connection with Word and teaching, while implying at the same time that there are other elders with different responsibilities, all part of the one public ministry of the church. Martin Chemnitz, the chief author of the Formula of Concord, states: “And in 1 Timothy [5]:17 [Paul] mentions two kinds of presbyters, of whom some labored in preaching and teaching, while others had been placed in charge of ecclesiastical discipline. . . This about completes the list of ranks into which we read that the ecclesiastical ministry was divided at the time of the apostles” (Chemnitz, Examen Part 2, p. 684).

 

The adopted statement says with certainty that God allows offices that have a limited public use of the Means of Grace. There are indications in Scripture of other offices of public ministry existing than simply that of the office of overseer/bishop/presbyter. These offices (deacons, teachers, evangelists, etc.) included certain spiritual duties that involved public ministry (e.g., using the Word to minister to souls on behalf of the church; 1 Timothy 3:8f).

 

Ephesians 4 includes a list of offices not confined only to the pastoral office: “It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers…” Chemnitz gives this interpretation of the Ephesians passage regarding the forms, or ranks, of the public ministry where he describes “pastors as those placed over a certain flock, as Peter shows (I Peter 5:2-3) and who not only taught but administered the sacraments and had the oversight over their hearers.” Chemnitz goes on to describe the teachers as “teachers, to whom the chief governance or oversight of the church was not entrusted but who only set the doctrine before the people in a simple manner, such as catechists were later: thus Paul (Rom. 2:20) speaks of ‘a teacher of children,’ and the word ‘teach’ is expressly used in this sense in Hebrews 5:12” (Chemnitz, Examen, Part 2, p. 684). It is also worthy of note that the Ephesians citation lists “evangelists” as a separate office/form, even if one were to call into question the separate terms of “pastors” and “teachers.” Clearly not only the pastoral office is mentioned.

 

The revision document of Circuit #8 uses the logic that, since God has not commanded such offices with a limited public use of the keys, therefore none of these “allowed or permitted” offices can be classified as instituted or established by God. This reasoning does not follow.

 

By way of analogy we can speak of the divine institution of marriage between one man and one woman. No one will argue that this divine institution means that every adult male or female is obligated to be married. On the other hand, a person may get married when the circumstance presents itself to do so. The wide institution of marriage, however, assures society that the men and women who enter it really are in the entity instituted by God, and this is meant for proper assurance and blessing. We draw the connection this way: The wide institution of the Public Ministry does not mean that all churches, for example, need to have Lutheran elementary school teachers. But the divine institution does assure the church that the men and women who serve as Lutheran elementary school teachers in a congregation are in the entity set up by God, and this is meant for proper assurance and blessing, along with responsibility.

 

Another analogy has also been used. Note how God instituted government in Romans 13. Here it appears that a wide institution is in place, insofar as God has not specified the precise type of government (democracy, monarchy, oligarchy, etc). Government is divinely instituted and God has specified its role of responsibility; however, the specific instances are not divinely established in the same way. Similarly, God has instituted the Public Ministry and within this institution the church has some freedom to set up certain offices (seminary professors, teachers in Christian day schools, etc), while still upholding the command to have a presiding office, whether the term pastor, shepherd, bishop, presbyter or any other names are used for this particular office.

 

You might say that basically the German words Predigtamt (preaching office, wider in scope) and Pfarramt (pastoral office of oversight) serve to illustrate this point. One could say that Predigtamt is to Pfarramt as government (Romans 13) is to the U.S. three branches, or to the Crown and Parliament. A wider institution is given, in which also the oversight office is obviously predominant. Insofar as the Predigtamt, the office that Christ has instituted in establishment of the apostles, has work that is done by the Pfarramt, one must say that the Pfarramt is and has the Predigtamt. The offices of Ephesians 4 (apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers) and 1 Corinthians 12:28 (teachers, helpers, leaders), as well as the deacons of 1 Timothy 3 (at least), the presbyteri, episcopoi, and certainly the angelos of Rev. 2 & 3, the Priester of the middle ages, and the Pfarrherren of the Reformation do not all have the Pfarramt, but they do all have the Predigtamt. The latter is the one, unchanging constant.

 

Here we wish to call attention to a citation from the works of Dr. Luther, where he indicates that his own view of Predigtamt was not identical with Pfarramt:

The estate I am thinking of is rather one which has the office of preaching [Predigtamt] and the service of the word and sacraments [Dienst des Worts und der Sacramente] and which imparts the Spirit and salvation, blessings that cannot be attained by any amount of pomp and pageantry. It includes the work of pastors [Pfarramt], teachers, preachers, lectors, priests (whom men call chaplains), sacristans, schoolmasters, and whatever other work belongs to these offices and persons. This estate the Scriptures highly exalt and praise. St. Paul calls them God’s stewards and servants [1 Cor. 4:1]; bishops [Acts 20:28]; doctors, prophets [1 Cor. 12:28]; also God’s ambassadors to reconcile the world to God [2 Cor. 5:20].

[Sondern den Stand meyne ich, der das Predigtamt und Dienst des Worts und der Sacramente hat, welches gibt den Geist und alle Seligkeit, die man mit keinem Gesänge noch Gepränge erlangen kann, als da ist, das Pfarramt, Lehrer, Prediger, Leser, Priester, (wie man Kaplan nennet, Küster, Schulmeister, und was zu solchen Ämtern und Personen mehr gehöret, welchen Stand die Schrift, wahrlich, hoch rühmet und lobet. St. Paulus nennet sie Gottes Haushalter und Knechte, Bischöffe, Doctores, Propheten, dazu auch Gottes Boten, zu versöhnen die Welt mit Gott, 2 Cor 5:20]….. (Luther: “Sermon on Keeping Children in School” [1530] Walch X, 488, AE 46, 220). [bold emphasis added]

 

To repeat: Our adopted statement rejects the false notion that, since God has not commanded a particular office with a limited public use of the keys [“offices that the church, in her freedom, may establish”– citation from “The Public Ministry of the Word], therefore none of these offices can be/are instituted or established by God. A variety of divinely instituted offices are mentioned in the New Testament. This means, for example, that when a call is extended to a Lutheran elementary school teacher to instruct children in the Word of God on behalf of the church, this call indicates that the person is serving in the Public Ministry and truly possesses a divine call. For this reason, the synod’s adopted statement says:

Extending calls to teachers who have spiritual care of children in Christian schools is not merely a laudable custom, but is in accordance with Romans 10:14–17 and Augsburg Confession XIV, not only for the sake of good order, but also because these teachers carry out a specific part of the Public Ministry. It is by human right that the church separates a limited portion of the office to one individual. But it is by divine right that one exercises that work on behalf of the Christians through whom the call has come. [bold emphasis added]

 

3)    The antithetical statements #8 and #9 in “The Public Ministry of the Word” are omitted in the revision document.

 

The two antitheses not appearing in the revision of Circuit #8 are these:

• “We reject the teaching that only those qualified to carry out a full use of the keys are in the Public Ministry.”
• “We reject the teaching that the Public Ministry is limited to any one divinely fixed form, that is, limited to the pastoral office to the exclusion of other teachers of the Word.”

 

The purpose of antithetical statements is to sharpen the points of doctrine where misunderstandings or misinterpretations could easily and/or inadvertently occur. “The Public Ministry of the Word” contains thirteen antitheses. The two that are listed above were intended to clarify or to sharpen the substance expounded in the document. It needs to be noted that these are missing in the revision document of Circuit #8.

 

While the revision document does acknowledge “theological professors” for example, as falling within the divine institution of Public Ministry, it does not grant this status to other offices such as listed in section II. B. of “The Public Ministry of the Word.” If the contention is being made by the omission that only those trained theologically with a seminary education, i.e., trained to be a parish pastor, or who are ordained, constitute the Public Ministry to the exclusion of other offices with a limited public use of the keys, we note that our adopted statement rejects such a dogmatic assertion. Scripture itself does not restrict the matter.

 

We believe that the non-inclusion of these antitheses conflicts with the definition of the Public Ministry as adopted by the synod. The revision document seeks to prescribe for the church a certain confined definition of the Public Ministry that cannot be substantiated from Scripture.

 

4)    The placement of AC XIV and its primary Scripture reference, Romans 10:14-17, is in the revision document under the section called “The Pastoral Office”; whereas, in the adopted statement it appears as a separate point that encompasses both the narrower and the wider sense of Public Ministry.

The question of using AC XIV for divine calls other than pastors has been before us in our discussions over the years. The basic requirement stated here not only applies to pastors of congregations, but to anyone who represents the church in doing public ministry work. The formality of the call, of course, may vary in different circumstances.

But Scripture itself (Romans 10) necessitates the call. Yet Scripture does not prescribe exactly how the call is issued.

 

Our understanding of AC XIV is that this article of the Augsburg Confession provides us with a safeguard against anyone presuming to hold and occupy a teaching/preaching position in the life of the church without the prerogative and direction/authorization of the group of Christians doing the calling. There appears to be nothing in this article that absolutely forbids this rule from applying to more than the ones who serve as the pastors of congregations; in fact, the principle behind AC XIV needs to be upheld. For this reason, the adopted statement scrupulously reads: “Extending calls to teachers who have spiritual care of children in Christian schools is not merely a laudable custom, but is in accordance with Romans 14:14-17 and Augsburg Confession XIV…” [bold emphasis added]

 

The primary verse that this document draws attention to as the reason for the confessors including AC XIV is Romans 10:14-17, which is a major proof passage for the doctrine of the call. The word “preach” here is a more general use of the term, not limited to parish pastors. The word khruvssw in Romans 10 is used much in the same way as it is found in Mark 16:15, where “preach” is not restricted to the sermonizing of those in the pastoral office. In Romans 10 khruvssw is used in a general way to describe the proclamation of the Gospel by all whom the church sends out.

 

Dr. U. V. Koren wrote: “So the office also belongs to the congregation. But Christ has given the congregation the command and the explanation concerning the public execution of the office, which has just been mentioned and which our church confesses in the 14^th article of the Augsburg Confession. Therefore it is also the congregation which calls its preachers and teachers and which has to see to it that these do the work they are called to do.” (“The Right Principles of Church Government,” 1899, quoted in Faith of Our Fathers, pp. 125, 126) [bold emphasis added]

 

In the Treatise, par. 67, we find this important remark: “For wherever the church exists, the right to administer the Gospel also exists. Wherefore it is necessary for the church to retain the right of calling, electing and ordaining ministers. This right is a gift given exclusively to the church, and no human authority can take it away from the church. It is as Paul testifies to the Ephesians when he says, ‘When he ascended on high he gave gifts to men’ (Eph. 4:8, 11, 12). He enumerates pastors and teachers among the gifts belonging to the church…” [Please note that Ephesians 4, where teachers also are listed, is in the Treatise a proof passage for the church to issue calls.]

 

One must be called in order to teach the Word on behalf of the church and in the name and stead of Christ. If one has a divine call to teach the Word, that person is in the public ministry. There is no divine call but the divine call to the public ministry. It is unscriptural and unconfessional to teach the Word of God on behalf of a group of believers without having received a divine call to do so. The adopted statement confesses:

The church in an orderly way extends divine calls in the name and stead of Christ and on behalf of the believers. Those who possess divine calls are serving in the Public Ministry of the Word in either a narrower or a wider sense (Acts 13:2-3, 14:23, 20:28; 1 Corinthians 3:4-9, 21-23). [bold emphasis added]

 

5)    The revision document states that what is carried on by human right cannot be divinely instituted, and thus cannot be an office whereby one enters through a divine call.

 

The revision document refers to “Sacred Ecclesiastical Offices,” but does not view these offices, such as Lutheran elementary school teachers and other teachers, as existing within the divine institution of the Public Ministry. Defenders of the revision document have held: “Incumbents of such offices do sacred work but they do not hold the office of divine institution. The office they hold is by human right.” | “Offices of churchly origin are not divinely instituted.” | “It is wrong to teach that what the church in her divinely given freedom may do or leave undone is an institution of God.” [These citations are taken from a paper entitled, “Does the Bible Teach a Limited Public Use of the Keys?” delivered at the northern MN circuit on April 24, 2005.] Once again, we refer to footnote #1 in the revision of Circuit #8:

Other Sacred Ecclesiastical Offices (see III. Below) are called the Public Ministry in a Wider Sense because they are not specifically instituted by God . . . [bold emphasis added]

 

Our Evangelical Lutheran Synod has considered offices such as the office of a Lutheran elementary school teacher as a part of the overall institution of the Public Ministry. The revision document of Circuit #8 speaks of a “call” for the Lutheran elementary school teacher, but does not acknowledge it to be the type of call that is “in accordance with AC XIV,” a phrase that is found in our adopted statement.

 

How can there not be a divine call for anyone who is put in the place of publicly teaching the Word of God on behalf of the congregation? AC XIV itself states, “No one should publicly teach in the Church or administer the sacraments unless he is rightfully called.” How can a confessional Lutheran be willing to permit someone to teach God’s Word regularly in the church without being rightfully called by God to do so, through the mediation of the church?  

 

The practice of the ELS down through the years has been to extend divine calls to our teachers, and practice is intended to reflect doctrinal principles. Our synod’s Guidelines state: “The designation of duties and the call meeting concerning a teacher should be conducted in the same manner as for pastors in Article I.C. above” (“Handbook of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod,” 19-A). The church extends to them a divine call to teach God’s Word publicly to the children.

 

The adopted statement confesses:

One cannot hold the office of the Public Ministry of the Word unless called by God (Romans 10:14–17, AC XIV). Some men, such as the apostles, were called immediately, directly by God, to the Public Ministry. Since the time of the apostles God calls mediately (Acts 1:15-26) through the church so that there will always be qualified individuals who have been set apart to administer publicly His means of grace for the salvation of souls. The church in an orderly way extends divine calls in the name and stead of Christ and on behalf of the believers. Those who possess divine calls are serving in the Public Ministry of the Word in either a narrower or a wider sense (Acts 13:2-3, 14:23, 20:28; 1 Corinthians 3:4-9, 21-23). [bold emphasis added]

 

While the Lutheran elementary school teacher exercises the keys in a public way, it is in a limited way, having a part of the instituted office (Predigtamt), not the whole of it. Does this mean that God has instituted simply a “part of the office,” or merely “a limited use of the keys”? It does not, and to assert that the adopted statement teaches that is to speak falsely. It does mean, however, that since the schoolteacher does administer a limited portion of the divinely instituted office (Predigtamt), no one can presume to take up that calling on his own but can only do so by the call of God that is exercised through the church.

 

Since the divine call of the Lutheran elementary day school teacher is also the call of Romans 10 and Article XIV, which is the only divine call, why should not the Lutheran elementary school teacher be included within the institution of the public ministry? Romans 10 and Article XIV speak only of the public ministry of our Lord where one uses the Means of Grace in the name and stead of Christ and on behalf of the church. There is no other public ministry of the Word. The adopted statement confesses:

Extending calls to teachers who have spiritual care of children in Christian schools is not merely a laudable custom, but is in accordance with Romans 10:14–17 and Augsburg Confession XIV, not only for the sake of good order, but also because these teachers carry out a specific part of the Public Ministry. It is by human right that the church separates a limited portion of the office to one individual. But it is by divine right that one exercises that work on behalf of the Christians through whom the call has come. [bold emphasis added]

 

It is the sincere prayer of Vice President Obenberger and myself, as well as the prayer of the members of the PCM who have provided valuable counsel in the preparation of this response, that the explanations given here will help the pastors and congregations of Circuit #8 and others in the synod recognize the differences between the proposed revision and the adopted statement.

 

May all be moved to see and acknowledge that the adopted statement, “The Public Ministry of the Word,” is a scriptural confession of the blessed doctrine of the Public Ministry instituted by our Lord.

 

 

John A. Moldstad, President

 

Note: For further documentation we refer you to our website (evangelicallutheransynod.org) under news from the President’s Office. Two supplementary documents, one by Prof. Erling Teigen and one by Rev. David Jay Webber may be of assistance. These are works of individuals and have not been produced by the ad hoc committee known as the PCM.