LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 10–12, 2012, Page 6

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Ecclesiastical supervision in The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod is not determined by “contemporary
situations,” “gut feelings,” “individual” judgment, personal opinion, or personal conscience, but by the
collective will, judgment, and conscience of the Synod, a human organization, as stated in its
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions. Such provisions in the Synod’s Constitution and Bylaws provide
not only “evangelical supervision” (Art. III 8), but also “protection for congregations, pastors, teachers,
and other church workers…” (Art. III 9). The Synod’s Constitution and Bylaws provide not only for the
membership requirement of “[a]cceptance of the confessional basis of Article II” (Art. VI 1), but also for
the freedom to participate in doctrinal discussions, brotherly dissent, dispute resolution, and determining
theological positions and practices.
The Synod’s covenant provides for a healthy balance of honoring and upholding the Synod’s position
while having the right to discuss issues freely and disagree with the Synod’s position or each other in
Christian love and respect, without suspicion, slander, and violating the Eighth Commandment and
without legalism, condemnation, dissension, and politicizing the matter. The ecclesiastical supervisor has
the ministry opportunity and responsibility to assist, to support, to facilitate, to lead, and to give advice in
the balance of these two tensions in an evangelical manner.
In conclusion, “In accordance with the confessional nature of participation in the Lord’s Supper (cf. pp.
19–23), and in agreement with Lutheranism’s historic position, it is inappropriate to attend the Lord’s
Supper at non-Lutheran altars. Since participation in Holy Communion, scripturally and confessionally
understood, entails agreement in the Gospel and all its articles, it would not be appropriate to attend the
Lord’s Supper in a church with which such agreement is not shared [emphasis added]” (1983 CTCR
Report, Theology and Practice of the Lord’s Supper, p. 25).
“What is said here about Lutherans in general (i.e., members of Lutheran congregations) certainly applies
also to Lutheran pastors (emeritus or otherwise), who by virtue of their office bear a special responsibility
“to witness publicly and privately to the one and only Gospel set forth in the Holy Scriptures (see CCM
response cited above [02-2278])” (February 12, 2010 CTCR Opinion).
However, a district president (ecclesiastical supervisor) cannot use constitutional Article VI 2 b as the
cause for an action to expel (Article XIII) a member from the Synod for simply attending worship, Holy
Communion, a wedding, and/or a funeral in a non-LCMS church.
In Res. 8-30B, the 2010 convention of the Synod resolved to study Article VI. Its second whereas
paragraph indicated in part the urgency of this study: “WHEREAS, Concerns have been expressed
throughout the history of the Synod, including recently, about the proper understanding and application of
Article VI with respect to the conditions or requirements for acquiring and holding or retaining
membership in the Synod.” These 2010 concerns of the convention echo the 1981 entreaties of President
Preus to give this matter our attention. The commission urges the timely implementation of this
convention resolution including its second-last resolve paragraph: “Resolved, That following the study,
the Commission on Handbook, in consultation and concurrence with the Synod President, the
Commission on Constitutional Matters and the Council of Presidents, submit a proposal to clarify and
affirm or amend Article VI to the next convention of Synod.”
92. Concordia University System Bylaws Review (11-2602)
The commission deferred review of the Concordia University System Bylaws until it has obtained a copy
of the Concordia University System Articles of Incorporation (as reviewed previously) to assist in the
review of the Bylaws.
240