# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_1975_S110 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 109 4. ADMINISTRATION To Transfer Congregations RESOLUTION 4-01 Overtures 4-16—4-20 (CW, pp. 185—186); 4-83U, 4- 84U (TB, pp. 16—17) Wuereas, The transfers of these congregations have been approved by both the transferring and the receiving Districts or their responsible officials; therefore be it Resolved, That the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod authorize the transfer of: Chapel of the Cross, Milwau- kee, Wis., from the English to the South Wisconsin District; Trinity, Hammond, Ind., from the English to the Indiana District; St. John’s, Onarga, Ill., from the North- ern Illinois to the Central Illinois District; First, Char- lotte, Mich., from the English to the Michigan District; Trinity, Masaryktown, Fla., from the SELC to the Flor- ida-Georgia District; Faith, Greenfield, Ind., from the English to the Indiana District; Trinity, Hudson, Wis., from the North Wisconsin to the Minnesota South Dis- trict; Sherman Park, Milwaukee, Wis., from the South Wisconsin to the English District. Action: Adopted (2). . (The Committee added Trinity, Hudson’s, request to the list in presenting Res. 4-01. After the convention had decided not to amalgamate English District members with the respective geo- graphical Districts, the committee withdrew Res. 4-23 and sug- ested that Sherman Park’s request for a transfer be added to s. 4-01. The convention gave formal approval to this sugges- tion in Session 11.) To Dissolve English District RESOLUTION 4-02A (Replacing Res. 4-02) Report 4-04, III, L(CW, p. 139); N.O. Res. 4-41 (CW, p. 439); Overtures 4-22A—4-32 (CW, pp. 186—189) Preamble The Convention Committee on Administration, in considering the serious question which was laid before it by the church, is cognizant of the far-reaching implica- tions of its decisions, and the consequences of its actions on the life and well-being of the members of Christ’s Church. It further recognizes that its decisions must strengthen and support the total structure of The Lu- theran Church—Missouri Synod and contribute to its future success and progress. We therefore humbly and sincerely assure all those affected by our judgments and actions of our sincere concern as fellow members of the body of Christ, and of the love which believers must always demonstrate to their fellow redeemed. It is in this spirit of submission to the Spirit’s guidance that we present the following. The historical relationship of The Lutheran Church —Missouri Synod and its English District is a long and interesting one. At the encouragement of our synodical leaders three congregations organized to form the Eng- lish Evangelical Lutheran Conference of Missouri in Harold Hecht, President of the English District 1872, which grew into the English Evangelical Lutheran Synod of Missouri and Other States in 1888. In 1905 the Missouri Synod established a committee to confer with the English Synod so that further understanding be- tween the two Synods could be achieved. Closer ties were desired, and the Missouri Synod adopted a resolution in 1908 declaring that union with the English Synod was desirable. This culminated in the 1911 convention. At the 1911 convention the English Synod became the Missouri Synod’s “English District.” The Articles of Un- ion began as follows: Resolved, That we regard it as most expedient and as most salutary for both parties to this union if individual congregations of the English Synod join the respective Dis- trict of our Synod, and that we entertain the hope that this end may be reached in the very near future. Resolved, That whereas this mode of union cannot be adopted at the present time, we nevertheless receive our English sister Synod as a District. For the first time in its history the Missouri Synod had established a “language District,” not as a perma- nent arrangement but as an interim or temporary mea- sure. In view of these beginnings, it is not at all surprising that overtures came to the floor of the Missouri Synod conventions proposing amalgamation of the English Dis- trict into the geographical Districts as early as 1923— only 12 years after the original union. When the Mis- souri Synod dealt with this memorial, it adopted the following resolution: Since all Districts of Synod are becoming more and more English in their work, we do not deem it wise to reject said memorial outright, but believe this proposal should come from the English District and therefore ask it kindly to discuss the matter. It is probably from this resolution that the myth has arisen that the initiative for amalgamation must come from the English District. This “gentleman’s suggestion” was not a part of the original 1911 resolutions. There is no evidence anywhere that the prerogative of amalgama- tion belongs to the English District rather than to the Synod.