LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2007, Page 280

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

280 SYNOD STRUCTURE AND GOVERANCE

8-58

To Overrule CCM Opinion 05-2454 re Convention
Communion Worship Service

WHEREAS, The CCM was asked, “May a congregation host a
communion worship service at a convention in another district
without the district president’s approval?”; and

Wuereas, CCM Opinion 05-2454 says, “There is no require-
ment that a congregation obtain approval from a district president
before hosting worship with Holy Communion. The congregation
as a member of the Synod will recognize, honor, and respect the
Office of District President and the fact that the Synod has divided
itself into districts and circuits, especially for the sake of responsi-
ble ecclesiastical supervision by the appropriate ecclesiastical su-
pervisors. For instance, a district president may exercise ecclesias-
tical supervision in regard to the activity of the local convention
committee (which normally includes local pastors) occurring in his
area of jurisdiction”; and

WHEREAS, The Wittenberg faculty in 1638 said, “Concerning
your fourth question: the pastor is not permitted privately to per-
form official pastoral functions in another diocese without the per-
mission of the regular pastor, even though a large or perhaps the
largest part of his parishioners have followed him there, for the call
is limited not only to a certain number of parishioners but also to a
definite place” (quoted in The Form of a Christian Congregation
by C. F. W. Walther, p. 168); and

WHEREAS, Deyling writes, “No pastor or minister of the church
should administer the most blessed Sacrament to anyone not be-
longing to his parish without the permission of the superintendent,
except to sick persons who are traveling” (quoted in The Form of a
Christian Congregation, pp. 168—69); and

Wuereas, Frederick Balduin writes, “Schisms, that is, divisions,
are disagreements in the church which, because of ceremonies,
works, and respect for persons, are incited among those who other-
wise agree in the articles of faith; such disunities not only are the
source of great offense but also inflict serious wounds on the church.
Therefore, though a division is less [serious] than a heresy (faction),
it is nevertheless something more dreadful than any other transgres-
sion. Augustine explained...‘the schismatics...separate themselves by
unlawful disagreement from brotherly love, though they believe what
we believe’” (quoted in The Form of a Christian Congregation,
pp. 165-66); and

WHEREAS, The Rev. Dr. C. F. W. Walther makes these quotations
favorably; and

WHEREAS, Walther himself says, “Every congregation shall
agree with its neighboring sister congregation on their mutual
boundaries” (The Form of a Christian Congregation, p. 166);
therefore be it

Resolved, That the 2007 LCMS convention overrule CCM
Opinion 05-2454 on question 4; and be it further

Resolved, That the 2006 Montana District convention memori-
alize the 2007 LCMS convention to do so.

Montana District

8-59

To Overrule CCM Opinion 06-2464
re District Convention Issues

WHEREAS, The Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM)
in Opinion 06-2464 muled: “‘it is in violation of the Constitution and
Bylaws of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod for a district in
convention to consider a memoria! that promotes a division of the
Synod, given the synodwide consequence of such a proposal”; and

WHEREAS, Synod Bylaw 3.1.6.2 states:

Overtures to a convention of the Synod may be submitted only by a
member congregation of the Synod; a convention or board of directors
of a district, an official district conference of ordained and/or commis-
sioned ministers; the faculty of an educational institution of the Synod;

the Board of Directors of the Synod; a board or commission of the
Synod listed in Bylaws 3.2.2, 3.2.2.1, 3.2.3, and 3.2.3.1; a committee
established by a prior convention; or a forum of a circuit;

and

WHEREAS, In light of this bylaw, a district convention may con-
sider any issue of synodwide consequence that it wishes to submit
as an overture to the Synod in convention for consideration; there-
fore be it

Resolved, That CCM opinion 06-2464 be hereby overruled,
with the understanding that district conventions be allowed to con-
sider any issue of importance to the Synod as well as to the district
and its congregations.

Zion
East Moline, IL

8-60

To Overrule CCM re Confessional Standard Language

WHEREAS, The constitution of a congregation of the LCMS is
an indispensable document for congregational self-understanding
and governance; and

WHEREAS, Constitutions of LCMS congregations, LCMS rites
of ordination for pastors and installation of church workers (LW,
p. 211; LSB, p. 179), and confessional statements of the Synod
(Art. I of “A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Mis-
souri Synod”; “‘A Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Princi-
ples” [1973]) have included the descriptive words “revealed,” “in-
spired,” or “inerrant” as standard, time-honored language that
details the position of Holy Scripture (2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Peter
1:20~21; 1 Cor. 2:9-13; 14:37; Acts 24:14; Ps. 19:7; Rom. 3:2;
1 Thess. 2:13; John 8:31-32; 17:20; 10:35; 2 Cor. 13:3; 1 Peter
1:12) and the position of our Lutheran Confessions (LC IV 57); and

WHEREAS, District constitution committees of the LCMS,
charged by the CCM to judge whether new or revised constitutions
of congregations in their district are ‘in harmony with Holy Scrip-
ture, the Confessions, and the teachings and practices of the Synod”
have now prohibited congregations seeking approval of their sub-
mitted constitution and bylaws from including such descriptive
words as “revealed,” “inspired,” or “inerrant” in the “Confessional
Subscription” section of their constitution, judging inclusion of
such language as being in violation of “Guidelines for the Consti-
tution and Bylaws of a Lutheran Congregation” and “go[ing] be-
yond the Synod’s own confessional standards”; and

WHEREAS, The recent opinion of the CCM has left no other av-
enue of appeal for congregations seeking inclusion or retention of
this descriptive language in their constitutions; therefore be it

Resolved, That the 2007 LCMS convention affirm that the de-
scriptive words “revealed,” “inspired,” and “inerrant” do not go be-
yond the Synod’s confessional standards; and be it further

Resolved, That the 2007 LCMS convention direct the CCM not
only to cease directing congregations seeking approval of their con-
stitutions and bylaws to remove such descriptive language from
their “Confessional Standards” paragraph, but also to encourage
congregations to retain such time-honored language that describes
in a clear and heipful way the nature of the books of the Old and
New Testament; and be it finally

Resolved, That “Guidelines for the Constitution and Bylaws of
a Lutheran Congregation” be revised to reflect the freedom LCMS
congregations have previously enjoyed faithfully to describe the
nature of Holy Scripture in the “Confessional Standards” paragraph
of their constitutions using the descriptive words “revealed,” “‘in-
spired,” and/or “inerrant.”

Shepherd by the Lakes, Syracuse, IN; St. Paul, Brookfield,
IL; Greater Egypt Circuit Forum 11, Southern Illinois
District; Redeemer, Huntington Beach, CA; Brainerd
Circuit 6, Minnesota North District; Immanuel, Orange,
CA; Our Savior, Granbury, TX; St. Paul, Pomona, CA;
Circuit 3 Forum, South Wisconsin District; Holy Trinity
Hacienda Heights, CA; Our Savior, Whitefish Bay, WI;
Shepherd of the Springs, Colorado Springs, CO; Mt. Olive,