The Purpose and Meaning of Synodical Structures

In following a thread on the ALPB site I read a comment by Pastor Weedon on the purpose and role of the Synod that caused me to pause and think. He wrote:

"The difficulty, as I see it, is that in these parts we were always told that we contribute to Synod to support work together that we can't do alone so well: training pastors and missionaries; training teachers; providing published materials. Now, the problem with this argument became apparent some years back: the Synod doesn't give funds for those things anymore. The seminaries and colleges are on their own; the missionaries raise their own money; CPH gives money TO the Synod. So what ARE we giving the money for? That's the challenge. I think the tightened financial times for Synod can only be healthy. We've got a bloated bureaucracy at the top, and it can be pared down - especially in this age of the internet! Time to do some serious rethinking."

A debate has raged for some time now within LCMS circles, at least, on the overall purpose, direction and meaning of the synodical structure. One of those debates regards the fundamental question of whether "Synod" is "church" is the technical sense of the term, or whether it is just a political structure or man-made affiliation of churches. Dr. Marquart, as I remember it, believed that Synod was Church. Others disagree. Those who disagree see the true church only in the manifestation of the local congregation. Thus, synodical officers are simply corporate bureaucrats. And the practice of the Eucharist at large synodical gatherings is simply inappropriate if it is not directly hosted by a local congregation. I struggle with this. Did Paul view the churches of Asia only individually, or collectively? Were letters, such as the one written to the church in Corinth, written only to one local congregation, or was this a letter written to several under the title of the "church of Corinth"? The same with Rome, for we know that in the early church there were several churches in the greater Roman metropolis.

At any rate, the more immediate question raised by Weedon is very timely, especially as congregations consider how to appropriate their giving in light of a tighter economy. Why exactly do we give to Synod if it no longer directly supports many of the ministries it once did? Is the structure in need of some serious pruning? His point bears more thinking: "I think the tightened financial times for Synod can only be healthy. We've got a bloated bureaucracy at the top, and it can be pared down - especially in this age of the internet! Time to do some serious rethinking." What are your thoughts?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Firefighter's Cross

Image
[Note: A similar article to this will be shared with my department at their next meeting. During this Lenten season when we are meditating on the significance and meaning of the Passion of our Lord and the Cross at Golgotha, it seemed like one way to offer a witness to the department that captured their interest and yet was not too heavy.] [Editorial Note: In response to a recent comment on this article I have made some changes to the original version of this article especially in regard to references to the so-called St. Florian's Cross. For any confusion the previous unreferenced information may have caused I apologize. I hope that the changes are satisfactory.] THE STORY OF THE MALTESE CROSS In many ways the familiar symbol to the right requires no explanation. It is the universal insignia of firefighting nationwide. Yet the precise origins of this symbol are less clear. The most popular explanation proposes its beginning in the far distant past of medieval Crusaders fi...
Read more

Historical Roots of the Warham Guild Hood

Image
In doing just a little checking on the internet, it's interesting to see how the Warham Guild hood, which I have as part of my STM degree attire, is actually a throwback to the Medieval hood. One article notes "the work of the Warham Guild in its imaginative renderings of medieval hoods" (reference is from here ). Again, here is my hood: The Medieval hood, which was originally a very practical outer garment to cover a person's head and shoulders, protecting both from the elements, bears striking resemblance to this revived form: This hood was also a part of the garb of monks in that era. The Medieval hood, in some cases, also had what is known as a "liripipe," a long tail hanging from the back of a hood. You can see the modern stylized version of this on my own hood. From an article on "Academic hood development" we read that "By 1463 the favourite dress of doctors was the hood with round bell-shaped cape, and the lir...
Read more

Five Things You Shoud Not Say at Funerals

Image
After preparing for a couple of funerals here recently, I was reminded of an article I read a few years back in the Concordia Journal entitled, "Five Things You Should Not Say at Funerals" (October 2003). My one pet peeve with funerals I attend as a guest is the all too frequent absence of Christ crucified and risen. Too often the content is trivial and shallow and centered on the life and times of the deceased instead of our Lord. However, even after several years of ministry, I realize that I may not have always presented the fullness of our hope as accurately as possible, even while preaching Christ. Dr. Jeff Gibbs gave me pause to think. The five things he tells us we ought not to say: 1.) "Bob has received the crown of righteousness, and he has heard the Lord say, 'Well done, good and faithful servant.'" Gibbs reason for not saying this: Like some of the phrases to follow, these are words that point to the final Day of Judgment, not to th...
Read more