LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2007, Page 277

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

SYNOD STRUCTURE AND GOVERANCE 277

II of the Constitution, adopted doctrinal statements of the Synod,
and doctrinal resolutions of the Synod” (Bylaw 3.3.1.1.1 [c]); and
such other constitutional terminology as “counsel,” “care,” and
“protection” (Art. III 8 and 9); therefore be it

Resolved, That CCM Opinions 2296 and 2309 be affirmed by
the 2007 Synod convention; and be it further

Resolved, That when an ordained or commissioned minister or
member congregation has acted in a manner that is consistent with
the counsel of the district president, the Synod is precluded from
taking any action to terminate the membership of its member who,
when performing his/her official duties, follows the advice and
counsel of the ecclesiastical supervisor designated by the Synod.

Grace
Elyria, OH

8-47

To Request Clarification of CCM Opinion 02-2309
re Ecclesiastical Supervision

WHEREAS, CCM Opinion 02-2296 refers to Opinion 02-2309
“for a thorough treatment of this issue”; and
WHEREAS, Opinion 02-2309 states,

“Gt would be inconsistent with the above constitutional provisions
to place the membership of an individual or congregation at risk where
that member relies on the ecclesiastical supervision and counsel of the
person called and chosen for that role or function. If an act is in fact
contrary to Article XIII of the Constitution, the member who acted can-
not be charged since he or she acted according to the advice of his or her
ecclesiastical supervisor. It should be noted, however, that when an ec-
clesjastical supervisor discovers error in his counsel, it is incumbent
upon that supervisor to correct or amend it. The member should then
be held to consider the corrected counsel. Failure to consider such
amended admonition could form the basis for disciplinary action as pro-
vided in Article XIII”;

and

WHEREAS, Some people in Synod have come to the conclusion
that such a statement could “grant immunity from expulsion”; and

Wuersas, The CCM certainly did not intend to grant immunity
from expulsion when they wrote that “the member should then be
held to consider the corrected counsel. Failure to consider such
amended admonition could form the basis for disciplinary action
as provided in Article XIII”; and

WuerEAS, As is the case with all speech, it may be possible to
make clearer what was said that has been misunderstood; therefore
be it

Resolved, That the Northern Illinois District request the CCM to
clarify their statement so that the opinion could be more easily un-
derstood.

Northern Illinois District

8-48

To Reaffirm or Decline CCM Opinions 02-2296
and 02-2309

WuereAasS, There has been a great deal of discussion regarding
CCM Opinions 02-2296 and 02-2309; and

WHEREAS, These decisions have caused confusion among some
in the Synod regarding ecclesiastical supervision and personal ac-
countability; therefore be it

Resolved, That the South Wisconsin District requests the 2007
LCMS convention to reaffirm or decline these rulings.

South Wisconsin District

8-49

To Take Responsibility for Teaching and Actions

WHEREAS, Mankind often seeks to limit or get rid of individual
responsibility for actions by placing it on others in some way. This

can be seen within the Church as we seek to use ecclesiastical su-
pervisors, resolutions at conventions, CTCR documents, nice-
sounding phrases taken out of biblical context, and other human
means to justify our actions; and

Wuereas, God gives clear principles to guide our teaching and
actions in His Word, the only perfect source to guide our lives; and

WHEREAS, All are sinners, and all can and do make wrong deci-
sions, regardless of position or numbers involved. Our sinful na-
ture also makes it difficult for us to fully see the truth in God’s
Word and creates apparent exceptions to His principles; and

WHEREAS, There is tension in applying biblical principles in our
day-to-day lives as we seek to do that which is pleasing to God,
which can result in that desire to avoid responsibility or action; and

WHEREAS, It is good to seek the advice and guidance of others
and.in our documents of various kinds (“traditions”) as we seek to
understand God’s Word and make good decisions, but we must
also remember the weaknesses that all have and that we are each
ultimately responsible for our own actions, regardless of the advice
that we receive; therefore be it

Resolved, That we see the tension in applying biblical princi-
ples as a blessing that points us into God’s Word and that we test
all things with God’s Word; and be it further

Resolved, That we not seek rules for the exceptions or, worse
yet, to make the exception the rule, but carry out an exception to
God-given principles only when we do so due to a higher biblical
principle. In other words, we seek to fully understand God’s guid-
ance to us on any given situation; and be it further

Resolved, That we avoid the exceptions if there is no higher bib-
lical principle or we are unwilling or unable to carry it out accord-
ing to God’s Word; and be it further

Resolved, That each individual, leader, congregation, and orga-
nization be held responsible and take responsibility for their actions
whether in repenting of error when shown from Scripture, or in
standing firm regardless of the cost when true to Scripture; and be
it finally

Resolved, That we look to Scripture in determining if there is
error, and where there is, deal with the individual from a heart of
love in seeking to draw them back to the truth of God’s Word and
His saving grace (Matt. 18:15~20).

Immanuel
Seward, NE

8-50

To Overrule CCM Opinions 02-2296 and 02-2309
re Advice of Ecclesiastical Supervisors

In Christian love for the congregations of The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod, the Board of Directors of the Minnesota
South District of the LCMS expresses concern regarding Opinions
02-2296 and 02-2309 of the Synod’s CCM.

WHEREAS, The CCM has opined that the “Constitution and By-
laws of the Synod do not allow or contemplate the expulsion of a
member of the Synod on the basis of an action taken with the full
knowledge and approval of the appropriate ecclesiastical supervi-
sor” (02-2296; see also Opinion 02-2309); and

WHEREAS, Scripture repeatedly warns against partiality in judg-
ment (Deut. 1:17; Eph. 6:9; Col. 3:25; James 2:1, 9) and against
“making the word of God of none effect through [human] tradi-
tion” (Mark 7:13), “teaching for doctrines the commandments of
men” (Mark 7:7), and Scripture teaches, “we must obey God rather
than men” (Acts 5:29); and

WHEREAS, The CCM’s stance is also incompatible with the
Lutheran Confessions, which teach that “it is not lawful for a
human being to repeal an obligation that is plainly a matter of di-
vine right” (AC XXVII 24, Kolb-Wengert, p. 85) while denying
that biblical texts such as Luke 10:16 and Heb. 13:17 grant eccle-
siastical supervisors any authority beyond the Gospel itself (Ap
XXVIII 17-21, pp. 291-92); and