LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2013, Page 251

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Structure and Ecclesiastical Matters
Whereas, Many congregations, schools, and other agencies
within the respective districts have enjoyed a unique district history
and identity characterized by close relationships and a strong and
long-standing sense of partnership with one another and with the
respective district office and administration; and
Whereas, Many districts not only have identified and adopted significant district-related mission and ministry endeavors, but also have
engaged the congregations of the districts to support these endeavors financially as district-wide projects. Such endeavors include but
are not limited to
•
•
•
•
•
•

•
•
•
and

ethnic ministries both in metropolitan and remote areas;
mission and ministry to and with the deaf;
new mission congregations and other mission starts and endeavors;
humanitarian assistance ministries;
funding acceptance for campus ministries;
direct support for international missionaries and mission partnerships;
grants-in-aid to students preparing for church vocations;
grants to assist professional church workers in reducing educational
debt; and
programs for training and equipping lay leaders;

Whereas, In gratitude for God’s blessings, many of which have
been channeled through district-related missions and ministries, many
dedicated individuals and families have chosen to give significant
gifts and bequests to districts specifically for the support of special
missions and ministries associated with their respective district; and
Whereas, Seven districts operate their own church extension
funds (CEFs), which through their assets, investments, and loans have
been able to provide loans to self-supporting and mission congregations, to schools, and to other mission or ministry agencies within
their districts at rates below commercial loan rates, while providing
investor rates comparable to or above many commercial investments;
and
Whereas, Both the current geographic size of many districts and
the number of congregations and schools within those districts allow
on-site visitation by the district president assisted by the district vicepresidents and circuit counselors in accord with Synod Bylaw 4.4.4
as well as visitation by other district executives—without excessive
travel time or cost, enhancing the close relationship between districts
and congregations; and
Whereas, A reconfiguration of the districts of Synod will not only
result in the loss of unique district identities and partnerships associated with each district’s mission and ministry endeavors, but “upon
dissolution of a district, all property and assets to which the district
holds title or over which it has control shall be transferred immediately to the Synod or its nominee” (Bylaw 4.1.4); and
Whereas, 2010 Res. 8-07 in its first Resolved statement established that a special task force will submit to the 2013 Synod
convention a recommendation that includes “general principles of
viability” for districts; therefore be it
Resolved, That after the 2013 LCMS convention adopts these
“general principles of viability” in accordance with Bylaw 4.1.1.3
(b) (3), at least two convention cycles (six years) will be allowed for
the reconfiguration task force to continue its study; and be it further
Resolved, That each district in the Synod be given four years during which time it will review the “general principles of viability”
along with its unique mission and ministry endeavors. Such a study
will involve the congregations and circuits of the district. If a district initially finds that it is not viable according to Synod’s “general
principles of viability,” it will be allowed time within the four year

251

period to address this matter and attempt to make appropriate adjustments; and be it finally
Resolved, That the reconfiguration task force give due consideration to the input from each district of Synod prior to making any
recommendation for district reconfiguration and that if “general
principles of viability” for districts are adopted at the 2013 LCMS
convention, no recommendation for synodwide reconfiguration of districts be proposed for adoption prior to the 2019 LCMS convention.
Board of Directors, South Dakota District
7-07

To Emphasize Ecclesiastical Supervision
in Reorganization of Districts
Whereas, The true unity of the church is found in the pure teaching of the Gospel and right administration of the sacraments (AC
7); and
Whereas, The primary constitutional objective of The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod is, “under Scripture and the Lutheran
Confessions,” to “[c]onserve and promote the unity of the true faith
(Eph. 4:3–6; 1 Cor. 1:10) … and provide a united defense against
schism, sectarianism (Rom 16:17), and heresy” (Art. III 1); and
Whereas, District presidents shall “especially exercise supervision over the doctrine, life, and administration of office of the
ordained and commissioned ministers of their district and acquaint
themselves with the religious conditions of the congregations of their
district” (Art. XII 7); and
Whereas, The Synod has elaborated in Bylaws 4.4.4, 4.4.5, and
4.4.6 the duties of the district president in these regards, requiring
congregational visitations, theological interaction with ministers
under his ecclesiastical supervision, and investigation and resolution of problems in doctrine and practice, these being well-reasoned
and godly responsibilities and demanding of a president’s time and
energy in proportion to the number of congregations he serves; and
Whereas, The most intimate and influential interaction of the
Synod with pastors and congregations, including visitations, encouragement, and consolation, the call and placement of new ministers,
and dispute resolution, is through their respective district presidents;
and
Whereas, The Synod has, at the direction of the 2010 convention (Res. 8-07), undertaken to study the realignment of her districts;
therefore be it
Resolved, That any process of district realignment have as its primary focus the preservation or realignment of districts as functional
units of ecclesiastical supervision, to be of such a size and character
that can be properly supervised by a district president; and be it further
Resolved, That this concern for effective ecclesiastical supervision, which entails the district president’s close interaction with
ministers and member congregations, be considered chief among the
“general principles of viability for a district” as called for in Bylaw
4.1.1.3 (b) (3); and be it further
Resolved, That the congregations and ministers benefiting from
the ecclesiastical supervision afforded by their district presidents
be granted the right of advice and consent regarding any proposed
realignment, being themselves the best judges of the viability of their
districts; and be it further
Resolved, That district presidents be encouraged to take up this
chief aspect of their duties with zeal and faithfulness toward the
Scriptures, the Lutheran Confessions, and the ministers and congregations committed to their care; and be it further
2013 Convention Workbook