Parish Delegates

THE CONGREGATION IS ALSO THE CHURCH:

VOTING BY PARISH DELEGATES AT SYNOD

(The following are a few thoughts from Pastor David Borgas)

I am sharing what I consider to be the proper role of delegates to the general synod.

I cannot believe that a congregational/parish delegate can vote on a doctrinal matter at the general synod in a way which is completely at odds with the clear opinion of the parish/congregation which he/she represents. 

I am quite prepared to stand corrected, and shown that I have got it wrong (which is always possible, of course).

Congregations are, of course, to hear and consider the views of others.  Certain views cannot be followed, however, and the congregation cannot permit synod to rule over it, if synod’s views are opposed to the Word of God.

Delegates do not function exclusively as representatives of their congregations.  They are to be conscious of both functions.  They are representatives of their congregations; they are also to listen to other congregations and synod representatives.  Their primary task, however, is to bring their congregation’s position to the synod.  Otherwise a synod (which consists primarily of congregational representatives) would have no purpose.  The individual congregational representative does not represent the entire church.

It is not clever to take the synod as church and the congregation as church, and play the two off against each other.  That, I would suggest, is un-Lutheran.  The congregation is actually far more likely to be the locus of the church than the synod, for it is in congregations where the Word of God is constantly preached and the Sacraments are repeatedly administered.  That is what builds and sustains the church!  That is where Christ reigns!  The Apology, Article XIV, seems to be particularly instructive at this point, where ecclesiastical order is actually the public teaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments.  In relation to a particular issue, it is quite possible for the synod to be on the wrong path, and a congregation to be on the right path.  The congregation cannot, then, follow the false path mapped out by synod.  Of course, it can also be the other way round.

It must be clearly understood that what God’s Word says is decisive.  God’s Word binds equally both synod and congregation.  Where there is disagreement as to whether a matter is opposed to God’s Word or not, the synod cannot make the decision on the basis of its authority.  In such situations, both congregation and synod are to submit to the authority of the Scriptures, and let them decide.  If such endeavours still fail to produce an outcome, then both parties must follow their consciences.

It is impossible to regard delegates exclusively as personal representatives of synod.  It is not true that the Church is represented only by a handful of delegates (“unrepresentative swill?”) and not, above all, by congregations.  Where individual delegates are expected to make their own independent decisions, and the directives of the congregation are to have little or no binding force on the delegate, the temptation at synod to unduly influence those who might represent a different position will be irresistible, especially in situations where just a couple more votes are needed to secure the required majority.  Where uncertainty continues to exist regarding a particular issue on which a decision has to be made, the voices of the individual congregations, clearly and faithfully expressed by congregational delegates, can help establish what congregational members are thinking.