"Carl Vehse": LC-MS change on Antichrist doctrine (Excursus to DL7b)

      This blog post is being inserted as an Excursus to Part 7b in the series on Prof. Friedrich Lochner's essay on Luther's hymn against the murdering Pope. The following was communicated to BackToLuther by past commenter "Carl Vehse" as a comment. But it was apparent that the complexity and the extent of his research deserved a separate full blog post to allow the full formatting required for a webpage presentation.  His research shows the "heavy lifting" required to extract all the details of this obscure, but important, change from the teaching of the Old Missouri Synod to that of the subsequent LC-MS (highlighting is mine): 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Carl Vehse"

In its 1932 Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod: Of the Antichrist, the Missouri Synod clearly agreed with the Smalcald Article's statement about the pope as the Antichrist: "... Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is "the very Antichrist." (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)

But then, in his article, "Changes in the Missouri Synod" (Concordia Theological Monthly, Vol. XXXVIII, July-August, 1967, no. 7, pp. 458-78) Arthur C. Repp stated (p. 466):

 

Changes have taken place in the Missouri Synod also due to what may be called an error of judgment or a deep-seated prejudice which failed to recognize that an identification made in history cannot be placed on the same level as a clear enunciation from the Holy Scriptures. This may be seen in the Synod's stand on the identification of the Antichrist. In addition to the statement of the Smalcald Articles (Part II, IV, 10), which identifies the pope as "the real Antichrist," and Article 43 of the Brief Statement, the literature of the Missouri Synod abounds with many references identifying the papacy as the Antichrist.23

 

In 1951 and 1956 the President's Advisory Committee on Doctrine and Practice [Rev. Walter Nitschke; Rev. Carl Eberhard; Rev. Ottomar Krueger, D.D.; Prof. Walter W. Stuenkel] reported on the teaching concerning the Antichrist. The occasion for the report was an investigation of Dr. Arndt's essay which had treated this question. The committee reported

 

Scripture does not teach that the Pope is the Antichrist. It teaches that there will be an Antichrist (prophecy) . We identify the Antichrist as the Papacy. This is an historical judgment based on Scripture.  The early Christians could not have identified the Antichrist as we do. If it were clearly expressed teaching of Scripture, they must have been able to do so. Therefore, the quotation from Lehre und Wehre "goes too far." 24

 

The committee's report further stated, "The conflict arises in holding that this identifying is a clearly expressed doctrine of Scripture, whereas it is not." (Ibid., p. 15) 

The report of the advisory committee together with an explanation issued in May 1956 was approved by the Synod in convention at St. Pau1.25 

23 E. g., William Dallmann, "The Pope, the Anti-Christ," The Lutheran Witness, XXVII (Oct. 28, 1908), 172; Western District Proceedings, 1869, p. 37: "If we would not hold that the Pope is the very Antichrist, we would thereby deny a doctrine clearly set forth in Scripture"; and Francis Pieper, Dogmatik, III, 532; English translation, 467.

 24 Report of Aug. 15, 1951, p. 14. The reference to Lehre und Wehre is from an article ["The Doctrinal differences between Missouri and Iowa]" by Georg Stoeckhardt, L ([Vol. 50] Nov. 1904), 492, "We confidently assert that it is a matter of accepting in faith or rejecting a clearly expressed doctrine of Scripture."

 25 Proceedings, 1956, p. 525. A "Statement on the Antichrist" was adopted by the Joint Committee of the Synodical Conference, Oct. 15, 1958, and submitted to the Synod in 1959 (Reports and Memorials for the San Francisco Convention), pp. 486--491. The statement reflected the more traditional viewpoint and was not acted upon since the Synodical Conference had no opportunity to consider it (Proceedings, San Francisco convention, 1959) pp.189-90. No subsequent consideration has been given to it by the Synod. 

Note that the adopted Resolution 7, Committee 3 Statement on the Antichrist (1959 LCMS Convention Proceedings, pp. 189-90) concluded:

 Resolved, That action on the Statement on the Antichrist be deferred until the Synodical Conference has had an opportunity to consider this statement of the Joint Committee.

So it seems that while a President's Advisory Committee and a Synodical Conference Joint Committee approved of the change, the LCMS convention deferred such approval  action.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

The above highlighted statements by the LC-MS Prof. Repp and the committees essentially state that they do not agree with the Lutheran Confessions, specifically the Smalcald Articles, and so have judged themselves as not Lutherans. And the referenced article by Prof. Stoeckhardt in Lehre und Wehre identifies the LC-MS doctrine as the same as the Missouri Synod's opponent, the Iowa Synod. — I have been informed by the essayist that research on this matter is ongoing, so when there are updates to this, they will appear as amendments to this blog post.