# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2019_S497
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION
Ov. 9-15

•

To Amend the Synod Constitution
to grant a Lay Vote to Every Congregation
Preamble
When Jesus directs those attempting to admonish an erring brother,
He states that the final attempt of such admonition is to take the
matter before the Church (Matt. 18:17). To that assembly Jesus
predicates the authority to exercise the Office of the Keys saying,
“And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as
a Gentile and a tax collector. Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind
on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth
shall be loosed in heaven” (Matt. 18:17b–18). This God-given
authority is not limited by the size of a congregation, for Jesus goes
on to add a clear promise to be with even the smallest assembly or
congregation, “Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about
anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.
For where two or three are gathered in My name, there am I among
them” (Matt. 18:19–20).
The Lutheran Church in general and The Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod (LCMS) in particular have always held the
autonomy of the congregation in high esteem. The Confessions of
the Lutheran Church testify to the authority given by Christ to the
Church as recorded in the Scriptures. Particularly, the abovementioned verses of Matthew 18 are cited in the Treatise on the
Power and Primacy of the Pope defending the church’s right of
calling ministers (Tr 24). Later it is made clear that this authority
comes down to each congregation: “Therefore when the regular
bishops become … unwilling to administer ordination, the churches
retain their own right to ordain … ministers. Wherever the Church
is, there is the authority to administer the Gospel …” (Tr 66–67).
When the question of church and ministry was raised in the early
days of our Synod’s history, Pastor C.F.W. Walther expressed the
urgency of clarifying the scriptural position on the matter in part,
because of its implications for church polity (cf. C.F.W. Walther,
The Church & The Office of The Ministry, ed. Matthew Harrison
[St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2012], especially pp. xvii–
xix). Because of the divine institution of the Church and the Office
of the Holy Ministry, the LCMS has consistently upheld the
temporal right of a congregation to have a say in the business of the
Synod, and this say is not limited to pastoral representation, but has
also included the laity. In recent times, the voice of the congregation
has been heard through the voting of two delegates appointed by a
congregation to represent her at district conventions as well as at
circuit forums, where representatives to Synod conventions are
elected.
However, even though we acknowledge the God-given authority of
each congregation, our Synod has not allowed certain congregations
to be represented equally in the affairs of our Synod. As we walk
together we have muted the voices of many congregations by
calling “dual or multiple congregation arrangement served by the
same pastor” a “parish” and limiting each parish in such a context
to one pastoral and one lay vote (CCM Opinion 03-2327, “Voting
Rights of Congregations”). In one extreme case four congregations
served jointly by two pastors have been allowed a total of two votes
at district meetings (CCM Op. 09-2545, “Voting Rights of
Congregations”).
By disenfranchising certain congregations who hold membership in
the Synod, we have acted inconsistently on a number of levels.

•

497

Though we confess no divinely appointed form of church
polity, denying some congregations the right to the same
representation that other congregations have in matters of the
Synod is at best at a disconnect with our theological
understanding of a congregation’s embodiment of the
catholicity of the Church.
In some matters of the Synod that are dealt with on a
congregational level, every congregation is allowed to speak
for herself. However, in other matters, multiple
congregations served jointly by one or more pastors are
required to come together and speak with one voice thereby
reducing the value of each congregation’s voice.
Independent
Voice
Representation at
district conventions

X

Representation at
circuit forums

X

Election of circuit
delegates to Synod
convention

X

Vote on
amendments to
Synod Constitution

X

Nominate Synod
officers including
Synod President

X

Voting for Synod
President
Establishing
necessary number of
congregations for
electoral circuits

Shared Voice

X

X

•

In regard to voting at district conventions, the term parish
has come to mean a “dual or multiple congregation
arrangement served by the same pastor,” but the majority of
times parish is used in the Handbook it is used
synonymously with the term congregation, for example in
the following titles: “director of parish music” and “parish
assistant.” Such servants of the church are certainly not
limited to settings where two or more congregations have
come together to call a pastor.
• Furthermore, if the term parish is used consistently we must
also re-evaluate whom we elected to The Commission on
Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) seeing as Bylaw
3.9.5.1 requires “Two ordained ministers who are parish
pastors” (emphasis added).
The problems created by such a situation are only intensified when
the congregations making up a multiple congregation setting lie in
different circuits or even districts.
Some would claim that allowing each congregation in a multi-point
setting a vote at district conventions would throw off the balance
between laity and clergy. Historically the Synod has allowed for an
equal number of pastoral and lay voting delegates; however, no
great effort has been made to ensure that an equal number of lay and
pastoral delegates actually attend the convention of Synod. The
2019 Convention Workbook