LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2007, Page 317

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS 317

The very nature and purpose of a synodical fellowship need to be re-
stated once again. A synod is a “walking together.” The choice of the
word “synod,” derived from the Greek, is significant because it empha-
sizes the idea of unity. For good reason our church body has chosen for
itself the name: “The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.” We are con-
gregations, pastors, and teachers who have decided to join hands and to
walk together.

The Preamble of the Constitution has the subheading: “Reason for
the Forming of a Synodical Union.” Union was the major concern in
effecting the organization of the Synod. The concepts of fellowship, to-
getherness, brotherhood, and “walking together” express the basic pur-
pose of the Synod’s existence.

The reasons given in the Preamble for forming the union are “1. The
example of the apostolic church, Acts: 15:1-31,” and “2. Our Lord’s
wili that the diversities of gifts should be for the common profit, | Cor.
12:4-31.” Once again the emphasis falls upon the idea of unity.

In Article IJI, Objects, the fundamental thrust of the Synod is
not only clearly stated but is given preeminence. The first purpose
of the Synod is listed as: “The conservation and promotion of the
unity of the true faith (Eph. 4:3-6; 1 Cor. 1: 10) and a united de-
fense against schism and sectarianism (Rom. 16:17).” The Scripture
references include the admonitions to preserve the unity of the Spirit
in the bond of peace, to avoid all divisions, and to beware of divi-
sion makers.

Objects 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 continue with this theme. All of these
imply the quest for oneness, its preservation and extension.

Objects 7 and 8 need special emphasis in view of the questions
which have been raised regarding the formation and continuation of
groups which attempt to carry out the purposes which the Synod re-
serves for iself:

7. The supervision of the ministers and teachers of Synod with
regard to the performance of their official duties;

8. The protection of pastors, teachers, and congregations in the
performance of their duties and the maintenance of their rights.

The Synod was organized and is maintained to carry out these ob-
jects. The congregations, pastors, and teachers who by their own free
decision have joined the Synod have done so with the determination
that the important functions described in Article Ill (and we would
stress especially Objects 1, 7, and 8 in view of thé questions which have
been raised) should be carried out by the Synod. Any assumption of
these responsibilities by secret or open, voluntary or auxiliary, new or
established groups is disruptive of the synodical purpose and cannot be
tolerated.

Christians as well as non-Christians expect differences of opinion
and judgment to arise when people walk together. The Synod has pro-
vided for forums in which such differences can be discussed and evalu-
ated beyond the confines of the local congregation. The pastors and
teachers conferences; the circuit meetings; the synodical and district
board, commission, and committee meetings; the doctrinal supervision
and appeals procedures; and above all the conventions of the districts
and of the Synod provide the proper channels through which the issues
of opinion and judgment are to be discussed and decided. In the absence
of a clear word of God issues must be decided by the majority principle,
applied in Christian love and with Christian restraint (Article VIII C).
When the majority will has been determined, it must be respected. Oth-
erwise life together (synod) becomes all but impossible. Discussion may
indeed continue; but it needs to be carried on with full respect for the
majority will and within the forums established by the Synod for the
preservation of the synodical unity. If additional channels for discus-
sion are needed the Synod can provide for the same in its Bylaws
through appropriate convention action.

It is incongruous for separate groups to organize for the purpose of
policing the members of the Synod; it is equally incongruous for groups
to organize for the purpose of either shaping or nullifying a decision in
an area of concern in which the Synod has reserved to itself the right
of making decisions. Where the Synod has not reserved this right to it-
self (e.g., the decision to establish orphanages, high schools, old folks
homes, hospitals), congregations and individuals have the right to ef-
fect an organization so long as its objectives and operations do not inter-
fere with the purposes and functions of the Synod. However, where the
Synod has reserved this right to itself (e.g., the administration of its col-
leges and seminaries; the supervision of doctrine; the declaration of fel-
lowship with other church bodies), congregations and individuals have
no right under the Constitution of the Synod without the express ap-
proval of the Synod to effect organizations to achieve purposes for

which the Synod itself exists or to carry on activities which rightfully
belong to the duly elected or appointed officials of the Synod. Under
these circumstances such organizations become divisive and schismatic
and therefore subversive of the very purposes of the Synod.

Accordingly, and in response to the question submitted to the
Commission, it is not in harmony with the Constitution and By-
laws of the Synod for a member of the Synod or an unofficial
group within the Synod to assume such responsibilities as the
Synod has reserved for itself in its stated objectives, “which are the
objectives of the members themselves” (Bylaw 1.3.4).

Question 2: Is it in harmony with the Constitution and above By-
laws of the Synod for any member of the Synod or any
groups within the Synod to advocate the withholding
of funds from the Synod?

Opinion: In an October, 1966 opinion, the Commission on Consti-
tutional Matters, in response to an inquiry from the President of the
Synod, stated:

It is the opinion of the Commission that a congregation which with-
holds funds from the Synod is subject to serious admonition for divi-
sive and unbrotherly conduct which destroys the synodical concept it-
self of “a walking together.” If all efforts at admonition fail, such a
congregation shall in due course be subject to suspension and to even-
tual expulsion.

In a second October, 1966 opinion in response to a second ques-
tion from the President of the Synod, the Commission stated the
following regarding the activities of a group that was receiving and
disbursing funds for mission work:

Quite aside and apart from any legal rights which The State of the
Church, Inc. may or may not have, such synodicallyunauthorized re-
ceiving of funds raises suspicion in the minds of the members of the
congregations of the Synod and is divisive. Furthermore, since the dis-
bursement of such funds is on a selective basis, this likewise is divisive.
The Commission therefore holds that such activities can only militate
against the essential unity implied and involved in a synodical structure
(“a walking together”).

Accordingly, in response to the current question, a member of
the Synod or any groups within the Synod that advocate the with-
holding of funds from the Synod are subject to admonition for ac-
tivities that militate against the essential unity intended by the
structure of the Synod as provided in its Constitution and Bylaws.

Question 3: Is it in harmony with the Constitution and above by-
laws of the Synod for any member of the Synod or any
groups within the Synod to teach publicly, publicly ad-
vocate, or promote any position contrary to the posi-
tion of the Synod?

Opinion: Again, the above-referenced 1969 opinion (see response
to question | above) speaks to this issue:

In this opinion the Commission is not attempting to limit the right of
individuals to speak their own minds. Before and after the passage or re-
jection of synodical resolutions individuals must be free to express their
concerns, especially to their peers. Frank and open discussion, carried
on ina spirit of Christian love and forbearance, must be part of our life
together in the Synod. It can be proper and salutary. However, in this
opinion the Commission is addressing itself to the organizing of groups,
to the calling of meetings, secret or open, to attempted manipulation of
existing groups, to circularizing activities, and to a wide scale of joint
actions, all of which by their very nature tend to polarize or fragment
the constituency of the Synod, and thus have the effect of disrupting the
synodical unity.

All members of the Synod and of its congregations are to beware of
the danger of groups and activities which divide and splinter the Synod.
Synodical and district officers and board and commission members have
a special responsibility to identify divisive and subversive movements
and to avoid them. By their example and advice they are to conserve and
promote the unity of the true faith and the oneness of the Synod.
Accordingly, it is not in harmony with the Constitution and By-

laws of the Synod for any member of the Synod or any groups
within the Synod to teach publicly, publicly advocate, or promote
any position contrary to the position of the Synod. Dissent activities
are to be governed by section 1.8 of the Bylaws of the Synod to
which members have “commit[ted] themselves to act in accordance

2007 Convention Workbook