Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2013 · 65th Convention, St. Louis › Page 312

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2013, Page 312

front matter 1 front matter 2 front matter 3 front matter 4 front matter 5 front matter 6 front matter 7 front matter 8 front matter 9 front matter 10 front matter 11 front matter 12 front matter 13 front matter 14 front matter 15 front matter 16 front matter 17 front matter 18 front matter 19 front matter 20 Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 80 Page 81 Page 82 Page 83 Page 84 Page 85 Page 86 Page 87 Page 88 Page 89 Page 90 Page 91 Page 92 Page 93 Page 94 Page 95 Page 96 Page 97 Page 98 Page 99 Page 100 Page 101 Page 102 Page 103 Page 104 Page 105 Page 106 Page 107 Page 108 Page 109 Page 110 Page 111 Page 112 Page 113 Page 114 Page 115 Page 116 Page 117 Page 118 Page 119 Page 120 Page 121 Page 122 Page 123 Page 124 Page 125 Page 126 Page 127 Page 128 Page 129 Page 130 Page 131 Page 132 Page 133 Page 134 Page 135 Page 136 Page 137 Page 138 Page 139 Page 140 Page 141 Page 142 Page 143 Page 144 Page 145 Page 146 Page 147 Page 148 Page 149 Page 150 Page 151 Page 152 Page 153 Page 154 Page 155 Page 156 Page 157 Page 158 Page 159 Page 160 Page 161 Page 162 Page 163 Page 164 Page 165 Page 166 Page 167 Page 168 Page 169 Page 170 Page 171 Page 172 Page 173 Page 174 Page 175 Page 176 Page 177 Page 178 Page 179 Page 180 Page 181 Page 182 Page 183 Page 184 Page 185 Page 186 Page 187 Page 188 Page 189 Page 190 Page 191 Page 192 Page 193 Page 194 Page 195 Page 196 Page 197 Page 198 Page 199 Page 200 Page 201 Page 202 Page 203 Page 204 Page 205 Page 206 Page 207 Page 208 Page 209 Page 210 Page 211 Page 212 Page 213 Page 214 Page 215 Page 216 Page 217 Page 218 Page 219 Page 220 Page 221 Page 222 Page 223 Page 224 Page 225 Page 226 Page 227 Page 228 Page 229 Page 230 Page 231 Page 232 Page 233 Page 234 Page 235 Page 236 Page 237 Page 238 Page 239 Page 240 Page 241 Page 242 Page 243 Page 244 Page 245 Page 246 Page 247 Page 248 Page 249 Page 250 Page 251 Page 252 Page 253 Page 254 Page 255 Page 256 Page 257 Page 258 Page 259 Page 260 Page 261 Page 262 Page 263 Page 264 Page 265 Page 266 Page 267 Page 268 Page 269 Page 270 Page 271 Page 272 Page 273 Page 274 Page 275 Page 276 Page 277 Page 278 Page 279 Page 280 Page 281 Page 282 Page 283 Page 284 Page 285 Page 286 Page 287 Page 288 Page 289 Page 290 Page 291 Page 292 Page 293 Page 294 Page 295 Page 296 Page 297 Page 298 Page 299 Page 300 Page 301 Page 302 Page 303 Page 304 Page 305 Page 306 Page 307 Page 308 Page 309 Page 310 Page 311 Page 312 Page 313 Page 314 Page 315 Page 316 Page 317 Page 318 Page 319 Page 320 Page 321 Page 322 Page 323 Page 324 Page 325 Page 326 Page 327 Page 328 Page 329 Page 330 Page 331 Page 332 Page 333 Page 334 Page 335 Page 336 Page 337 Page 338 Page 339 Page 340 Page 341 Page 342 Page 343 Page 344 Page 345 Page 346 Page 347 Page 348 Page 349 Page 350 Page 351 Page 352 Page 353 Page 354 Page 355 Page 356 Page 357 Page 358 Page 359 Page 360 Page 361 Page 362 Page 363 Page 364 Page 365 Page 366 Page 367 Page 368 Page 369 Page 370 Page 371 Page 372 Page 373 Page 374 Page 375 Page 376 Page 377 Page 378 Page 379 Page 380 Page 381 Page 382 Page 383 Page 384 Page 385 Page 386 Page 387 Page 388 Page 389 Page 390 Page 391 Page 392 Page 393 Page 394 Page 395 Page 396 Page 397 Page 398 Page 399 Page 400 Page 401 Page 402 Page 403 Page 404 Page 405 Page 406 Page 407 Page 408 Page 409 Page 410 Page 411 Page 412 Page 413 Page 414 Page 415 Page 416 Page 417 Page 418 Page 419 Page 420 Page 421 Page 422 Page 423 Page 424 Page 425 Page 426 Page 427 Page 428 Page 429 Page 430 Page 431 Page 432 Page 433 Page 434 Page 435 Page 436 Page 437 Page 438 Page 439 Page 440 Page 441 Page 442 Page 443 Page 444 Page 445 Page 446 Page 447 Page 448 Page 449 Page 450 Page 451 Page 452 Page 453 Page 454 Page 455 Page 456 Page 457 Page 458

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

312

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

Opinion: In response to the contention that forming a dual parish
“deprives one of the congregations of its constitutional right of suffrage,” the commission ruled in May, 1972 (Ag. 181) that “in view
of the language of the Constitution in Article V A which speaks
of ‘every congregation or parish,’” the principle that “two or more
congregations being served by one pastor shall be regarded as one
parish entitled to only one set of delegates” is not contrary to the
Constitution and does not cause a congregation to lose its lay delegate representation at a district convention. Rather, it shares its
representation with the other congregation(s) in the parish, presumably in a fair and equitable manner.
3. A large congregation which does not need the financial support
of any other congregation, allows their pastor to provide pulpit supply
on Sunday afternoons for a small congregation which cannot afford a
full-time pastor. There are no other pastors available in the area.

Opinion: The question speaks of “pulpit supply.” It also speaks
of “a small congregation which cannot afford a full-time pastor.”
Regardless of financial considerations, if the pastor is regarded by
the small congregation as its pastor and speaks of him as its pastor, and if he provides Word and Sacrament ministry, ministers to
the sick and dying, etc., this and the larger congregation are a dual
parish being served by one pastor and, therefore, a parish to be represented at district conventions by the pastor and one lay delegate.
Such lay representation will be shared in a manner that presumably
is fair and equitable for both congregations.
4. Two congregations are being served by one pastor (the pastor is
called to a large congregation which does not need any financial help
to support their pastor). The large congregation allows their pastor
to provide pulpit supply on Sunday afternoons for the small congregation which cannot afford a full-time pastor, and where no other
pastor is available. The large congregation is in one visitation circuit
and the small congregation is in a different visitation circuit. Does
each congregation have a lay vote at the respective circuit forum in
electing (by a voting process) a circuit counselor? If so, how is this
different from voting representation at a district convention? Does
the small congregation, in effect, have to forfeit its lay vote to the
district convention to receive word and sacrament service from the
large congregation?

Opinion: This question again speaks of “pulpit supply” and a
“small congregation which cannot afford a full-time pastor.”
Again, if the pastor is regarded by the small congregation as its
pastor and speaks of him as its pastor, and if he regularly provides
Word and Sacrament ministry, ministers to the sick and dying, etc.,
this and the larger congregation are a dual parish according to the
Synod’s definition, entitled to representation at district conventions
by the pastor and one lay delegate. The fact that the congregations
are in separate visitation circuits has no bearing on the requirement
for one pastor and one lay delegate representation at district conventions.
Representation at circuit forums is another matter, such representation determined by Bylaw 5.3.2: “The circuit forum consists
of a pastor of each congregation and one member of each congregation designated by the congregation.” In this case, each congregation
sends a representative to its own circuit’s forum, the pastor serving
as representative to the forum of the circuit of the congregation in
which he holds membership.
Regarding whether the small congregation must “forfeit” its lay
vote to the district convention in order to receive Word and Sacrament
service by the pastor of the large congregation, here again it must be
said that a parish arrangement does not cause either congregation to
lose its lay delegate representation at a district convention. Rather,
2013 Convention Workbook

the congregations’ representation is shared—presumably through a
fair and equitable arrangement.
5. Two congregations that are being served by one pastor in a dual
arrangement (both congregations are needed to provide for a fulltime pastor) where one congregation is in one district and the other
in a different district. Does one congregation have to forfeit their
lay vote at their district convention because they are in a dual parish
arrangement?

Opinion: When a parish crosses district lines, it is nonetheless entitled to representation at district conventions by one pastor and one
lay member. The pastor is a voting delegate to the convention of
the district of which he is a member. The lay vote is shared by the
congregations as in any other parish, presumably in a manner that
is fair and equitable. The district membership of the congregation
of the lay delegate determines the district convention that he/she
will attend as a voting delegate.
(Adopted Nov. 11–13, 2011)

Role of CTCR and CCM Opinions, Doctrinal
Statements and Resolutions (12-2634)
With a letter received March 14, 2012, the chairman of a Hearing
Panel under Bylaw section 2.14 submitted two questions for the commission’s response in accord with Bylaw 2.14.7.8 (k) (2).
Question 1: In performing its function under Bylaw 2.14, what
weight or significance should a hearing panel give to:
(a) Prior opinions of the CTCR?
(b) Prior opinions of the CCM?
(c) Opinions of the CTCR or interpretations of the CCM
provided to the panel in response to questions submitted
under Bylaw 2.14.7.8 (k)?

Opinion: The role of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) is set out in Bylaws 3.9.5 through 3.9.5.2.2. Bylaw
3.9.5 indicates that the commission “exists to assist congregations
in achieving the objectives of Article III 1 and 6 of the Constitution
of the Synod and to assist the President of the Synod in matters of
church relationships.”
Bylaw 3.9.5.2.1 goes on to state that the CTCR “shall provide
guidance to the Synod in matters of theology and church relations.”
In performing its function, the CTCR is to prepare and distribute
special studies and documents to the members of the Synod and to
conferences, refer theological issues and questions to proper individuals or groups of individuals for additional study, suggest and provide
studies of contemporary issues, including current issues, foster and
provide for ongoing theological education, and obtain theological
treatises, conference papers, and similar documents and studies. The
CTCR also has responsibilities with regard to “Fraternal and Other
Organizations” under Bylaws 3.9.5.3 and 3.9.5.3.1 and responsibilities to assist the President of the Synod at his request in discharging
his constitutional responsibilities “for maintaining doctrinal unity
within the Synod” (Bylaw 3.9.5.2) and “for maintaining doctrinal
integrity as he relates to other church bodies” (Bylaw 3.9.5.2.2). In
addition, the CTCR receives from time to time special instruction and
direction from the Synod in convention.
Fundamentally, the weight or significance that a hearing panel
should give to a theological statement or opinion of the CTCR is the
same as the weight or significance that should be given by all members of the Synod. That is to say, its opinion should be recognized as
the considered opinion of the CTCR in attempting to carry out the
bylaw functions identified above.
With respect to the opinions of the Commission on Constitutional
Matters (CCM), Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (c) states that “[a]n opinion rendered