LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — September 30, 1977, Page 3

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Answer:

3.

Does the first object of the Synod (Article III, 1) include the conservation and promotion of the
unity of the true faith between two or more congregations of The Lutheran Church--Missouri
Synod and, if so, what responsibility does a District President have if it is obvious that such
fellowship is in need of repair? What responsibility does a District President have toward a new
congregation applying for membership when it is obvious that there are unresolved hostilities
toward another LCMS congregation in the same area? Should this matter receive his attention
before recommending them for membership or is the only requirement an acceptable
constitution?
Answer:

4.

The Bylaws do not require any prior recommendation on the part of the District
President or anyone else regarding the application of a congregation for
membership. It is understood, however, that the District President will obviously
deal in a pastoral way, exercising his best judgment, in difficult cases of friction
resulting in division. Such pastoral care should be continued even after reception
into membership.

Does Article III, 1-2 imply that when a group forms a new congregation in a smaller city in
which there are several LCMS congregations it is reasonable to assume that "walking together"
in the Synod requires some conversation and negotiation on the part of the new group with the
existing LCMS congregations? Is it in keeping with our Constitution and appropriate that the
District President request that the new congregation negotiate with existing LCMS
congregations in order to establish and affirm fellowship on the local level and that this effort be
made prior to their reception into membership?
Answer:

5.

The Commission calls attention to the fact that Bylaw 1.11, c, in its entirety
together with both of its subparagraphs, addresses itself to the practice of any
applicant congregation which seeks to exclude from membership for racial or ethnic
reasons.

The Constitution does not address itself directly to any specific procedures dealing
with the relationship of a new congregation with other congregations in the area. It
is taken for granted that good relations should be fostered, but again this involves
pastoral care and judgment.

Since the Synod's Board for Missions has an agreement with the Lutheran Council U.S.A. that
regional consultations be held when new ministries are initiated, is it in keeping with synodical
policy that the District President request an emerging congregation to share in such a
consultation prior to its admission into membership in the Synod?
Answer:

The Commission understands the LCUSA agreement of intent to be directed toward
the planning activities of District mission committees. But here again, pastoral care
and encouragement may certainly be assumed.

330. District Recognition of Organization as Auxiliary (Ag. 1208, A): Pastor H. L. Harnapp of North
Platte, Nebraska, had raised several questions regarding the propriety of a District recognizing as an
auxiliary organization ("Lutheran Lay Witness Weekend") an organization which intends to solicit
beyond the District boundaries and to open its membership to non-Missouri Synod individuals. The
Commission also had before it an explanatory letter from President Niedner. The Commission resolved
upon the following reply: