Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1932 · 35th Convention, Milwaukee › Page 118

LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1932, Page 118

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 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 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 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 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

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

⤓ Download page image (full resolution)

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

162 Proceedings of Thirty-Fifth Regular Convention,

Regarding this memorial, Committee 15 submitted the following
resolution : —

Wuereas, It appears that there is a difference of opinion regard-
ing the true interpretation of Article VII of Synod’s Constitution con.
cerning the relation of the Synod to its members, especially in refer.
ence to the meaning and scope of the term “advisory body”; and

Wuereas, The Central Conference of Northern N. ebraska has pe-
titioned Synod for an opinion in this matter, requesting the Synod to
cause a brief interpretation of Article VII of-the Constitution to be
written; and

Wuereas, It appears desirable that such an interpretation be
given the widest possible publicity; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod request the standing Committee on
Constitutional Matters to publish an explanatory article concerning
the true meaning of Article VII in the official organs of the Synod,
the Lutheraner and the Lutheran Witness.

This resolution was adopted by Synod.

Amalgamation of the English District Congregations
with Other Districts of Synod.

(Memorial 407.)

The increased use of the English language throughout all Dis-
tricts of our Synod during the past decade has brought forth petitions
to Synod concerning the amalgamation of English District congrega-
tions with other Districts of Synod. The 1923 convention of Synod,
considering a petition from the Visitors of the Western District, held
that a proposal for amalgamation should come from the English
District and asked that District kindly to discuss this matter. Synod
adopted a similar resolution in 1926.

The English District has not yet proposed amalgamation of its
congregations with Districts in which they are geographically located,
although reasons for amalgamation are stronger to-day than they were
a decade ago.

Therefore the Northern Illinois District, in convention assembled
at River Forest, Ill., June 28 to July 3, 1931, presents the following
resolution : —

“That the Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States be
requested to reconsider the resolutions according to which a move for
amalgamation must come from the English District and to take the
necessary steps to effect the amalgamation of the congregations and
pastors of the English District with the respective Districts of Synod
in whose territory they are located.”

; We urgently request Synod to give this matter most serious and
careful consideration for the following reasons: —

1. The English language is now the predominent language

Ev. Luth. Synod of Missouri, Ohio, and Other States. 1932. 163

‘throughout our Synod, and therefore the reasons which obtained

twenty or more years ago for a separate English District, scattered
over all parts of our vast country, do not obtain to-day.

2. Our bilingual congregations are doing mission-work adequately
and efficiently in the English language, and establishment of separate
and purely English missions is often a duplication of efforts and not
in the interest of economy.

3. Elimination of duplicate mission boards and missionary efforts
will forestall unbrotherly friction and rivalry in many parts of Synod.

4. Many of our circuits, congregations and laymen especially,
deplore the fact that congregations heavily burdened with the support
of their schools must contribute to mission subsidies and church ex-
tension funds from which competing churches without schools are
founded and supported.

5. Most of our bilingual Districts already have a number of purely
English congregations, which are in no way deprived of the benefits
of membership with Synod.

6. Amalgamation of our English District congregations and pas-
tors with other Districts will eliminate the offense given or taken in
mission-practise where there is competition for new fields.

Respectfully submitted by
Tue Nortuern Inunors District.
F. L. Genrs, Secretary.

Dissolution of the English District.
(Memorial 408.)

“WueErEas, Practically all the congregations of our Synod are now
bilingual and in consequence thereof an exclusively English District
is no longer needed for the promotion of English work in Synod; and

“Wuereas, An amalgamation of the congregations of the English
District with the respective synodical Districts in which they are
located would result in closer fraternal relations; and

“Wuereas, Such merger would make for a more unified policy in
the prosecution of the various endeavors of our church-work; and

“WHEREAS, The proposed amalgamation would obviate the in-
convenience to which the brethren of the English District are now
subjected in attending their District conference and board meetings
and would at the same time materially reduce their expenditures for
travel and the work of the various District boards; therefore be it

“Resolved, That we petition the Hon. Delegate Synod to approach
the English District with the request to consider seriously the question
whether the time has not come for the dissolution of its District.”

(See Report of South Wis. Dist., 1931, p. 76.)

Henry Grusser, President.
R. Scuroru, Secretary.