LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2013, Page 130

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

130

SYNOD REPORTS

of regular and consistent dialog with its congregations and members.
The support of its congregations is paramount to a strong church body.
To achieve this, the office of visitation must be strengthened.
Recommendation

The task force recommends the following actions by the Synod to
strengthen the effectiveness and understanding of visitation:
• The Synod in convention reaffirm that visitation is a primary function
of our Synod, districts, and circuits;
• The current title of “circuit counselor” should be returned to its previous designation of “circuit visitor”;
• Visitation circuits should be established to serve the needs of congregations as best determined by the district;
• The Synod President, with the aid of the Synod Vice-Presidents, must
be expected to visit with every district president at least once every
triennium;
• Every district president, with the aid of the district vice-presidents, must
be expected to visit every circuit counselor (visitor) and his congregation at least once every three years;
• The circuit counselor (visitor), at the request and under the supervision
of the district president, must be expected to visit every congregation
at least once every three years;
• The above expectations are to be understood to be minimal expectations,
and visitation beyond those expectations is encouraged;
• All visitations shall follow the general guidelines established by the
Council of Presidents, adapted to local circumstances;
• Because of the great importance of the spiritual office of circuit counselor (visitor), pastors and congregations are encouraged to give
careful attention to the qualifications and responsibilities for the selection of circuit visitors (Bylaw section 5.2);
• Districts and circuits are encouraged to consider also using qualified
retired pastors as circuit counselors (visitors);
• The Council of Presidents is encouraged to investigate and consider
means of improving appropriate visitation, care, support, and encouragement of all rostered members of Synod, including ordained and
commissioned ministers serving outside the congregations;
• Each district president develops a regular program for the evaluation of
the circuit counselor (visitor).
General Principles of Viability

The 1969 Synod convention adopted Res. 4-03, “To Establish
General Principles for Formation or Realignment of Districts” (1969
Convention Proceedings, p. 102). According to the resolution, “a
viable district—
1. offers adequate parish services;
2. provides adequate mission development, guidance, and support;
3. is adaptable and flexible in meeting new and various needs for ministry;
4. has boundaries corresponding to the major communications spheres
in a given area;
5. centers in a metropolitan area and has boundaries and internal structures adapted to the metropolitan areas within its boundaries;
6. evidences balance rather than homogeneity;
7. is compact in terms of travel patterns and travel time;
8. has sufficient potential financial resources for its own programs and
for the support of the synodical ministries;
9. is large enough to be effective and efficient;
10. has general acceptance by the constituency involved.”
Recommended Principles

The task force adopted the following recommended principles
for viability of a district. These will be presented as an overture for
consideration by the 2013 LCMS convention. These general principles should be considered when judging the viability of a district.
Does the district
2013 Convention Workbook

1. provide appropriate guidance and support to member congregations
for participating in the mission God has given to the church, including how that is carried out in the various missions and ministries of
the church?
2. carry out ecclesiastical supervision, as defined in the Synod’s Constitution (Art. XII) and Bylaws (Bylaw 1.2.1[g]), in a reasonable and
timely manner?
3. provide encouragement and needed congregational services (e.g.,
stewardship, conflict resolution, crisis counseling, financial counseling, calling process, collaborative efforts, networking, nourishment,
and help with evangelistic outreach, etc.) to member congregations
and provide advice and counsel to member congregations struggling
to carry out their core functions?
4. adapt to new circumstances and meet changing needs relating to the
mission and ministry of the Church?
5. ensure that the district president is carrying out the minimum requirements for official visits to each of the member congregations
as outlined in the Synod’s Bylaws (Bylaw 4.4.4), including coming
to the pastors and member congregations at least once every three
years as a brotherly advisor, “reminding them of the joy of serving
in the mission and ministry of the church”?
6. meet its financial responsibilities and obligations and receive sufficient financial resources from its membership to (i) support the
mission and ministry of the church in the district; and (ii) financially
assist the mission and ministry of Synod?
7. find itself to be of a size and configuration to be effective, efficient,
and capable of serving all who make up its constituency?
8. provide adequate assistance and support to allow the district president to carry out the functions and obligations of the office of district
president as set forth in the Bylaws?
District Configuration

With principles of viability as a guide, the task force considered
district configuration in light of the responsibilities of the districts and
their ability to carry out these responsibilities based on their respective financial and personnel resources.
The task force recognizes that each district has historical ties as
well as geographic and personality traits that bind it together. Districts
are currently internally organized to address the responsibilities of the
district based on their size in terms of both geography and number
of congregations and rostered church workers. The task force considered alternatives for the size of districts, considering larger and
smaller sizes and the current configuration. There is no right answer
that fits all districts or regions of the country. Size is not an indicator
of success or viability, but viability is determined by how a district
operates and fulfills its duties and responsibilities.
The task force recognized that there are efficiencies in certain
functions that could be realized by consolidation of smaller districts
(in terms of number of congregations). The task force also recognized
that potential improved efficiency and effectiveness might be realized
by redrawing district geographic lines, but the task force concluded
that changes of this type need to come from the districts. The task
force encourages districts to evaluate and consider changes.
Recommendation

Districts should consider, investigate, and develop collaborative
opportunities with neighboring districts or on a regional basis, compared to the viability principles. Consideration should be given to
collaboration between districts in areas such as mission planning,
finance and accounting, human resources, LCEF representative, information technology, stewardship, church planting, ministers of religion
conferences, and sharing staff resources. Districts should include in
their report to the next Synod convention the results of these efforts.