# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S239
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

synod structure and governance
“recommendations should include a transition plan for any property
and personnel changes”; and
Whereas, “The Synod is not merely an advisory body in relation to a district, but establishes districts in order more effectively to
achieve its objectives [cf. LCMS Constitution, Art. III] and carry on
its activities” (Bylaw 4.1.1); and
Whereas, “A district is the Synod itself performing the functions
of the Synod,” with resolutions of the Synod “binding upon the districts” (Bylaw 4.1.1.1); and
Whereas, “The Synod decides when and whether a district shall be
formed, divided, realigned, or merged with another or other districts,
or dissolved; determines the boundaries of a district; and approves
the name of a district” (Bylaw 4.1.1.3); and
Whereas, Districts are large ecclesial clusters (congregations and
circuits) established by the Synod for providing the most efficient
and effective care, support, advice, ecclesiastical encouragement,
service, coordination, and counsel that will foster the congregation’s
greater participation in God’s mission, while also being the primary
leaders in providing to congregations certain congregational services
(such as youth, stewardship, education, and outreach), coordinating North American mission efforts (including all ethnic ministries),
leading North American human care ministries, providing ministerial growth and support services, and giving worship guidance and
leadership; and
Whereas, Circuits are small ecclesial clusters established by districts for providing the most efficient and effective visitation, care,
support, advice, ecclesiastical encouragement, service, coordination,
counsel, and unity that will foster the congregation’s greater participation in God’s mission—the BRTFSSG is recommending that
this original purpose (bringing together such clusters of congregations that “walk together”) be restored and revitalized (cf. Bylaws,
Chapter 5); and
Whereas, Any proposal for reconfiguration of districts initiated
by a national convention of the Synod shall “include a substantiated
description of the nonviable aspects of the current district(s) on the
basis of general principles of viability adopted from time to time by
conventions of the Synod, and shall specify the problems or factors
which make the adoption of the proposal advisable or necessary”;
shall “provide evidence that the proposed change is the best of the
options available”; shall “provide a specific and realistic development
plan for the proposed district(s), including detailed proposals for staff
personnel and financial operations”; and shall “be the object of an
evaluation prepared by the Board of Directors of the Synod and submitted to the convention” (Bylaw 4.1.1.3 [b] [3]–[6]); and
Whereas, Such a study would determine whether districts that are
more uniform in size and more equitably equipped with human and
fiscal resources would be better able to carry out their responsibilities, including the new responsibilities that are being proposed; and
Whereas, The boards of directors of the Atlantic, Eastern, New
England, and New Jersey Districts desire to have a proactive involvement in such a feasibility study as proposed by the BRTFSSG;
therefore be it
Resolved, That the Atlantic, Eastern, New England, and New
Jersey Districts, through their boards of directors and under the leadership of the four respective district presidents, form a joint districts
feasibility study commission as soon as possible following the 2010
LCMS convention to study the feasibility of a merger in order to
carry out the above criteria for the function, number, and configuration of districts, in consultation and collaboration with the Synod’s

239

Task Force on District Function, Number, and Configuration; and
be it further
Resolved, That the Task Force on District Function, Number, and
Configuration, in consultation and collaboration with the joint feasibility study commission of the Atlantic, Eastern, New England, and
New Jersey Districts, develop a template for a model merger of districts; and be it further
Resolved, That the joint feasibility study commission of the
Atlantic, Eastern, New England, and New Jersey Districts report the
results of its study, its recommended template, and any other recommendations to its respective district conventions in the year prior to
the next convention of the Synod; and be it finally
Resolved, That the Synod’s Task Force on District Function,
Number, and Configuration include the template for a model merger
of districts, together with any other results or recommendations of
the study developed by the joint feasibility study commission, in its
own recommendations to be evaluated by the Board of Directors of
the Synod and submitted to the next convention of the Synod (Bylaw
4.1.1.3 [b] [6]).
Board of Directors
Atlantic District
8-52

To Oppose Dissolution of English District
Whereas, Rumors of dissolving the English District are again
being heard in geographic districts of the Synod; and
Whereas, The English District is one of two non-geographic districts in the Synod, serving in 17 states and Canada; and
Whereas, The entrance of the English District into the LCMS
differs from that of geographic districts in that the English District
was an existing entity, the English Synod, before joining the Synod
in 1911; and
Whereas, The English District brought not only existing congregations into the Synod, but also two colleges for ministerial
education, several publications, including The Lutheran Witness
and The Lutheran Guide, publishing rights for The Sunday School
Hymnal, and the complete manuscript for the first English hymnal
of the Synod, which served as its English hymnal until 1941; and
Whereas, The English District has resources and experience to
carry out rapid, intensive, and proactive mission work in the United
States, Canada, and foreign countries; and
Whereas, The English District’s purpose from the beginning has
been to provide for pastoral education and give guidance to parish
education through materials and programs; and
Whereas, The English District fulfills a servant role to local parishes, other districts, and the Synod; and
Whereas, The English District provides an extraordinary option
for parishes and individuals who thrive better in a non-geographic setting than a geographic one in that it is able to be about mission work
and more fully using God-given talents; and
Whereas, The Synod has benefitted from the many blessings the
Lord has heaped upon Lutheran Christianity through the existence
of a well-run, non-geographic district; therefore be it
Resolved, That the English District encourage The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod to lay to rest rumors of dissolving the
English District and encourage all districts to work together shoulder
to shoulder, using strengths from both non-geographic and geographic
districts in bringing the Gospel to waiting citizens of all nations; and
be it further
2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 239

4/15/10 2:39 PM