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
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