No Votes For You

I have learned via instructions from the Southeastern District that congregations that share a pastor constitute a "parish" (quotes original) and thus only get 1 shared lay delegate.

This is ridiculous in many and various ways.

Congregations who are vacant get a lay delegate.

Congregations who, during their vacancy (including what are essentially permanent vacancies) are served by the pastor of another congregation, get a lay delegate.

For the last district convention, Nazareth and Christ both got a lay delegate, although only Christ had a called pastor. Now that Nazareth has a called pastor (whom they happen to share with Christ), they are essentially being disenfranchised.

So, because they chose to to call a pastor (which is what a group of Christians should do), because they chose not simply to let the interim pastor hold their hands while the congregation died, a member-congregation of The LCMS is denied a vote in the district convention.

When I complained, both the district secretary and the synodical secretary pointed out that this is, indeed, synodical understanding. It has been since at least the 1960's. I would like to know when they decided that a "parish" meant multiple congregations sharing a jointly called pastor. It certainly isn't how the word parish is in use in The Synod. I guess I am the only "parish" pastor I know (personally - I know they exist).

Note that this will particularly disenfranchise two groups in The Synod - the rural congregations and, increasily, urban congregations like the ones I serve.

The fairness or reasonability of this aside, it also does not reflect our polity or supposed understanding of the Church as centered in the local congregation. Basically, it makes me as the pastor what defines a congregation (sorry, "parish"), not the fact that these are two separate congregations, both members of The Synod for over a century now, with separate constitutions, etc.

I understand not giving me two pastoral votes because I have two congregations. Duh. I do not understand giving congregations that share a pastor a partial vote. It's like the 3/5ths compromise all over again.

I wish I had time to argue about this, but I am sure it won't do any good. In the current climate in The Synod, especially with the Great Synodical Restructuring Thing, they are actively seeking to disenfranchise small congregations anyway, so I doubt if I'd get much sympathy.

The Synodical Reorganization Thing

Back when I was teaching Government to high school freshmen, I had an exchange with one of my students that went something like this:

"Mr. Sharp, why do we have to learn all this stuff? It's so boring!"

"You have to learn this, first of all, because the State says so, but also because it is good to know because the more information you have as a voter, the more informed vote you are able to cast."

"Well, I'm never voting."

"That's good. You probably shouldn't vote if you don't know or care about this."



She was offended, but not too much, I hope. And I was serious, but not too much. I guess everybody should vote if they want to, but, ideally, your voters would know what they were doing and vote on the basis on their knowledge and wisdom.

This leads me to the Great Synodical Restructuring Thing. One of their suggestions/talking points/whatever is that large congregations will receive extra votes (that's a horrible oversimplification, but that's the basic idea).

Question: Is the congregation of 50 very well-catechized Lutherans really less deserving of a vote - or deserving of half a vote, or whatever - than a congregation of 2000 people who may or may not have attended a Saturday "new members class" at their congregation which may or may not even call itself Lutheran? Do you think there are active members at some churches in our beloved Synod who don't know that they are members of a Lutheran church? These are the people you want having extra voting power?

I'm not suggesting that delegates to conventions should have to take an entrance exam, but I don't think they've thought out this proposal very well. There's a lot more to it than the perceived fairness of being more representative.

LCMS.

I am displeased with the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod.