R10 Commission on Doctrinal Review

R10

Commission on Doctrinal Review A. Actions During the Present Triennium The main responsibilities of the commission are to rule on appeals of decisions of a doctrinal reviewer before an item is published and to rule on a challenge to the doctrinal content of a publication by any of the Synod’s entities.

During the present triennium the commission received one appeal of a doctrinal reviewer’s decision. The commission denied the appeal and ruled in favor of the decision of the original doctrinal reviewer.

Also, the commission received one challenge to a published item and ruled that the item needed to be revised to correctly present Christian doctrine. The required revision was made by the publishing entity.

Also, the commission dealt with two other matters:

• The commission received a question about vague or misleading wording in an already published item. While vague or misleading wording is to be corrected in the doctrinal review process before publication, bylaws do not allow this to be the basis for a challenge after publication, so no action was taken.

• The commission received a question about the doctrinal statement in a publication, but no formal appeal was received. The publisher was contacted and agreed with the questioner that, due to a typological error, there was a misstatement that needed to be corrected. The publisher agreed to make the needed change, and the questioner agreed that no formal appeal needed to be filed in this case.

B. Bylaw Revision to Consider The commission is concerned that there is a difference between the reasons a doctrinal reviewer can reject a submitted item or ask for a revision of an item and the reasons that a member of the Synod can challenge an already-published item. Specifically, language that is vague or misleading is to be rejected by a doctrinal reviewer (Bylaw 1.9.2 [f]), but such language cannot be challenged once an item is published (Bylaw 3.9.3.2.2 [a]). If vague or misleading language is not desirable before publication, it is difficult to understand why it should be allowed to stand in an item that has been published. On the other hand, opening challenges to a publication on the basis of vague or misleading language may prompt many challenges and overwhelm the commission’s capacity to deal with them. This situation ought to be examined as to whether a bylaw revision is necessary or desirable.

C. Need for Training for Doctrinal Reviewers to Provide More Uniformity in Review Procedures and Doctrinal Analysis of Items Submitted for Review While doctrinal reviewers are conscientious and take their responsibilities seriously, there is little guidance offered them in performing their duties other than informing them of the bylaws that are to guide their work. This inevitably leads to a certain lack of uniformity in decisions. While total uniformity can never be achieved, the process might be improved by developing an online training module for reviewers that they should complete when they

2026 Convention Workbook 58 OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS ex officio member of the commission, while Saunders was elected to succeed him as chair. All other members of the commission are as noted in the Workbook directory.

The CTCR is currently served by three executive staff members, two full-time and one part-time. From 1991 through 2007, the CTCR was served by three full-time executive staff members. Since 2008, however, one of those full-time executive staff positions had been continuously vacant, primarily due to Synod budgetary limitations. The Rev. Dr. Joel Lehenbauer, who has served on the CTCR executive staff since 1991, has been executive director since 2008.

At its April 2023 meeting, the commission took action to reappoint Lehenbauer for a fourth five-year term (Bylaw 3.9.5.3.1[a][3–4]).

The Rev. Dr. Richard Serina Jr. is associate executive director (2020–present) and the Rev. Dr. Larry V ogel is assistant to the executive director (2009–present; part-time deployed since 2020). In addition to facilitating the work of the commission detailed below in this report, the executive staff also responds to emails, letters, and telephone calls requesting further information about or clarification of the Synod’s view of various topics and teachings, and regularly presents to members, agencies, and other groups and meetings of the Synod on its responsibilities and work, past or present. Staff also represented the CTCR on the Created Male and Female Task Force and the Concordia University System Board of Directors this past triennium, coordinated and contributed to numerous intra-church and interchurch relations meetings, and served as theological advisors for the LCMS Youth Gathering.

I. Theology A. Completed Assignments (Reports, Responses, Special Studies, and Study Documents)

The CTCR organizes its work using a variety of categories, as described in its duly adopted policy guidelines. The primary form that the completion of assignments takes is in reports, which are ordinarily convention-requested documents that set forth what the commission regards as a soundly biblical and Lutheran exposition of a particular issue of importance to the church. Study documents include study guides of existing reports, Bible studies, or more preliminary studies intended to stimulate discussion. Additionally, special studies and responses to various theological, ethical, synodical, or ecumenical matters may be produced. In certain cases, the commission receives requests for opinions which require more explanation than a customary opinion and/or may be of broader relevance to the Synod, so those opinions would be included in this section. Completed assignments are listed below in chronological order of completion. Since 2014, due to budgetary constraints, the commission has been unable to print and disseminate its documents to the Synod, with limited exceptions. All completed assignments, once published, are available online at lcms.org/ctcr.

1. Christian Decision-Making and the End of Life: An Update and Supplement to 1993’s Christian Care at Life’s End (1977 Res. 03-26)

In compliance with the standing assignment to provide direction in matters of bioethics, the commission reviewed its 1993 report, Christian Care at Life’ s End, and concluded that an update to that document was needed. The 1993 report had attempted to provide more practical case studies that built on 1979’s Report on Euthanasia with Guiding Principles, which was appended to Christian Care at Life’ s End. In the intervening years, medical and legal developments, particularly physician-assisted suicide, have changed The commission has met 12 times, so far, between the Synod’s 2023 and 2026 conventions, all via electronic means. It also took two electronic actions without a meeting and plans to meet in per - son in conjunction with floor committee weekend and the convention. Its minutes are available at lcms.org/coh.

Ken Ray Schurb, Chairman