# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_September 30 1977_S3 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) Answer: 3. Does the first object of the Synod (Article III, 1) include the conservation and promotion of the unity of the true faith between two or more congregations of The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod and, if so, what responsibility does a District President have if it is obvious that such fellowship is in need of repair? What responsibility does a District President have toward a new congregation applying for membership when it is obvious that there are unresolved hostilities toward another LCMS congregation in the same area? Should this matter receive his attention before recommending them for membership or is the only requirement an acceptable constitution? Answer: 4. The Bylaws do not require any prior recommendation on the part of the District President or anyone else regarding the application of a congregation for membership. It is understood, however, that the District President will obviously deal in a pastoral way, exercising his best judgment, in difficult cases of friction resulting in division. Such pastoral care should be continued even after reception into membership. Does Article III, 1-2 imply that when a group forms a new congregation in a smaller city in which there are several LCMS congregations it is reasonable to assume that "walking together" in the Synod requires some conversation and negotiation on the part of the new group with the existing LCMS congregations? Is it in keeping with our Constitution and appropriate that the District President request that the new congregation negotiate with existing LCMS congregations in order to establish and affirm fellowship on the local level and that this effort be made prior to their reception into membership? Answer: 5. The Commission calls attention to the fact that Bylaw 1.11, c, in its entirety together with both of its subparagraphs, addresses itself to the practice of any applicant congregation which seeks to exclude from membership for racial or ethnic reasons. The Constitution does not address itself directly to any specific procedures dealing with the relationship of a new congregation with other congregations in the area. It is taken for granted that good relations should be fostered, but again this involves pastoral care and judgment. Since the Synod's Board for Missions has an agreement with the Lutheran Council U.S.A. that regional consultations be held when new ministries are initiated, is it in keeping with synodical policy that the District President request an emerging congregation to share in such a consultation prior to its admission into membership in the Synod? Answer: The Commission understands the LCUSA agreement of intent to be directed toward the planning activities of District mission committees. But here again, pastoral care and encouragement may certainly be assumed. 330. District Recognition of Organization as Auxiliary (Ag. 1208, A): Pastor H. L. Harnapp of North Platte, Nebraska, had raised several questions regarding the propriety of a District recognizing as an auxiliary organization ("Lutheran Lay Witness Weekend") an organization which intends to solicit beyond the District boundaries and to open its membership to non-Missouri Synod individuals. The Commission also had before it an explanatory letter from President Niedner. The Commission resolved upon the following reply: