# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1944_S927
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

“Trinity Church’s jurisdiction — an issue fundamental to the welfar

842 APPEAL MATTERS -

[903] a
Statement of Trinity Ev. Luth. Church, Oak Park, il

Dear BRETHREN:
In the fear of God and awe of His Word Trinity Congrégation
has carefully reviewed its disciplinary procedure and the Opinion
of Synod’s Board of Appeals in the case of O.H.Pannkoke and >
his appeal.
We find that the Board of Appeals has failed to make any
ruling on a basic issue of the case, to wit, the acceptance of the
appellant into “membership” in a sister congregation of Synod |
in 1937 over the protest of Trinity Church and the continuance of ™
that “membership” in spite of rulings of both the Southern’”
(Jan, 11, 1938) and English (Dec. 13, 1939) Districts affirmin

of the souls involved, to the Scriptural and constitutional function:
ing of our Synod, and to the Scriptural authority and constitutional
prerogatives of every member congregation of Synod. The Boart
of Appeals renders no judgment on this disorderly situat:
although the issue was officially placed before it by the Transcript’
of the Records of Trinity Church (pp.12—17), by the Findings o
the Southern and English Districts, by letter of Trinity Church on® ;
Jan. 8, 1943, by the officers of the English District in a communica
tion of Feb. 13, 1943, and by oral statement by the pastor o
Trinity Church, supported by officers of the English District offi
cially present, to the Board on Feb. 16, 1943, at Fort Wayne, Ind.
for which last-named statement entry in the minutes of the Board:
was specifically requested.

We hold that to acquiesce in such procedure would be to for
feit one of a congregation’s inherent, basic rights as a member ‘o
Synod — the right to have its disciplinary action honored by every
sister congregation until such time as a case has been finally?
adjudicated ——and that such renunciation of its Scriptural an
synodical prerogatives should not be asked and may not be re
quired of a congregation. To do so is to disavow and _ nullify the: 4
purposes of synodical membership and the synodical fellowship

When the disorder perpetuated by the Board of Appeals’ silenc
on this irregularity of “dual membership” has been resolved, th
congregation will stand ready to adduce evidence for its furth
conviction that argumentation employed in the Decision rende
does not accord with Scripture, established church practice

and fact. Trintry Evancenica, LurHeran Crore

E. F. Fepier, Chairman
P. C. MERRYWEATHER, Secretary