LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1975, Page 487

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

CONSTITUTIONAL OPINIONS 489

tion of the unity of the true faith (Eph. 4:3-6; 1 Cor. 1:10) and a
united defense against schism and sectarianism (Rom. 16:17).”
The Scripture references include the admonitions to preserve
the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, to avoid all divisions,
and to be aware of division makers.
Objects 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 continue with this theme. All of these
imply the quest for oneness, its preservation and extension.
Objects 7 and 8 need special emphasis in view of the ques-
tions which have been raised regarding the formation and con-
tinuation of groups which attempt to carry out the purposes
which the Synod reserves for itself:
7. The supervision of the ministers and teachers of Synod with
regard to the performance of their official duties;
8. The protection of pastors, teachers, and congregations in the
performance of their duties and the maintenance of their rights.

The Synod was organized and is maintained to carry out the
objects. The congregations, pastors, and teachers who by their
own free decisions have joined the Synod have done so with
the determination that the important functions described in
Article III (and we would stress especially Objects 1, 7, and 8 in
view of the questions which have been raised) should be carried
out by the Synod. Any assumption of these responsibilities by
secret or open, voluntary or auxiliary, new or established groups
is disruptive of the synodical purpose and cannot be tolerated.

Christians as well as non-Christians expect differences of
opinion and judgment to arise when people walk together. The
Synod has provided for forums in which such differences can be
discussed and evaluated beyong the confines of the local con-
gregation. The pastors and teachers conferences; the circuit
meetings; the synodical and District board, commission, and
committee meetings; the doctrinal supervision and appeals
procedures; and above all the conventions of the District and
of the Synod provide the proper channels through which the
issues of opinion and judgment are to be discussed and decided.
In the absence of a clear word of God, issues must be decided by
the majority principle, applied in Christian love and with
Christian restraint (Article VIII C). When the majority will has
been determined, it must be respected. Otherwise life together
(synod) becomes all but impossible. Discussion may indeed con-
tinue; but it needs to be carried on with full respect for the
majority will and within the forums established by the Synod for
the preservation of the synodical unity. If additional channels
for discussion are needed, the Synod can provide for the same
in its Bylaws through appropriate convention action.

It is incongruous for separate groups to organize for the pur-
pose of policing the members of the Synod; it is equally incon-
gruous for groups to organize for the purpose of either shaping
or nullifying a decision in an area of concern in which the Synod
has reserved to itself the right of making decisions. Where the
Synod has not reserved this right to itself (e. g., the decision to
establish orphanages, high schools, old folks homes, hospitals),
congregations and individuals have the right to effect an organi-
zation so long as its objectives and operations do not interfere
with the purposes and functions of the Synod. However, where
the Synod has reserved this right to itself (e. g., the administra-
tion of its colleges and seminaries; the supervision of doctrine;
the declaration of fellowship with other church bodies), congre-
gations and individuals have no right under the Constitution of
the Synod without the express approval of the Synod to effect
organizations to achieve purposes for which the Synod itself
exists or to carry on activities which rightfully belong to the duly
elected or appointed officials of the Synod. Under these circum-
stances such organizations become divisive and schismatic and
therefore subversive of the very purposes of the Synod.

In this opinion the commission is not attempting to limit the

right of individuals to speak their own minds. Before and after
the passage or rejection of synodical resolutions individuals must
be free to express their concerns, especially to their peers.
Frank and open discussion, carried on in a spirit of Christian
love and forbearance, must be part of our life together in the
Synod. It can be proper and salutary. However, in this opinion
the commission is addressing itself to the organizing of groups,
to the calling of meetings, secret or open, to attempted manipula-
tion of existing groups, to circularizing activities, and to a wide
scale of joint actions, all of which by their very nature tend to
polarize or fragment the constituency of the Synod and thus
have the effect of disrupting the synodical unity.

All members of the Synod and of its congregations are to
beware of the danger of groups and activities which divide and
splinter the Synod. Synodical and District officers and board
and commission members have a special responsibility to iden-
tify divisive and subversive movements and to avoid them. By
their example and advice they are to conserve and promote the
unity of the true faith and the oneness of the Synod.

While the above opinion has been prompted by a specific
situation, it holds generally and addresses itself to a problem
which has troubled the Synod for some time. We are living in an
age in which a great number of institutions are under attack and
in which lack of confidence is rampant, an age of the conspiracy
syndrome and the power syndrome, after which “the Gentiles”’
seek. It should not be so among us. We need to remember that
we are not two or three or more synods; we are one synod,
pledged to share the journey. It is within the context of the Synod
—the forums, channels, and procedures which the Synod itself
establishes—that differing viewpoints need to be discussed
and an issue finally decided. Continuing dialog beyond the point
of decision must also be carried on within the same synodically
agreed-upon framework and in deference to the majority will.
We have committed ourselves not to that which divides but to
that which unites. We are one synod.

RESOLUTION 5-13
(Milwaukee Convention)

WHEREAS, This opinion issued by the Commission on Constitu-
tional Matters restates “the very nature and purpose of a synodical
fellowship” and clearly sets forth the basic theme of the Synod’s
Constitution, which is ‘‘the conservation and promotion of the unity
of the true faith” (Art. II, 1); and

WHEREAS, ‘‘Every member of the Synod shall . . . diligently and
earnestly promote the purposes of the synodical organization by
word, deed, and adequate financial support” (Handbook 1.05); and

WHEREAS, “In this opinion the commission is addressing itself
to the organizing of groups, to the calling of meetings, secret or
open, to attempted manipulation of existing groups, to circularizing
activities, and to a wide scale of joint actions, all of which by their
very nature tend to polarize or fragment the constituency of the
Synod and thus have the effect of disrupting the synodical unity”;
therefore be it

Resolved. That we warn against the formation and continuation
of groups which by their nature “become divisive and schismatic
and therefore subversive of the very purposes of the Synod”; and be
it further

Resolved. That we encourage ‘individuals to speak their own
minds, express their concerns, and provide for frank and open
discussion, carried on in a spirit of Christian love and forebearance”
within the context of the forums, channels, and procedures which the
Synod itself establishes for the preservation of the synodical unity;
and be it finally

Resolved. That we decline Overtures 5-57 and 5-58 in favor of
endorsing and upholding the commission's “Opinion Regarding
Dissenting Groups and Activities Within the Synod.”

Nov. 1—2, 1973