# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2023_S138
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

138

OFFICER, BOARD, AND COMMISSION REPORTS
of regents members regarding the current LCMS governance
and proposed changes to the governance structure;

in connection with the preparation of a proposed new governance
proposal.
To help carry out the directive of the 2019 Synod convention to
develop a new governance structure to be considered by the 2023
Synod convention, a committee was formed to assist in preparing a draft overture that proposes the new governance structure.
Consistent with 2019 Res. 7-03 requirements, the committee was
comprised of representatives of the Synod Board of Directors, CUS
Advisory Council, CUS Board of Directors, board of regents members, the President of the Synod, and the CUS president. Others
also were invited and involved as the 2019 Res. 7-03 Committee
proceeded with its work. Specifically, current Synod Secretary
John Sias assisted throughout the process, former Synod Secretary
Ray Hartwig assisted with drafting, Dr. Paul Philp of CUS assisted
with research and analysis, and Synod Chief Administrative Officer
Frank Simek assisted with financial analysis and research.
In addition to the specific direction given in 2019 Res. 7-03, the
7-03 Committee, as was necessary, also considered other factors as
prescribed in the LCMS Constitution and Bylaws. Any proposal
to the 2023 convention must be consistent with the Confession in
Art. II and the Objectives of Art. III of the Constitution. It also is
important to emphasize the relationship that all involved have to
the Synod. The Synod Board of Directors, the CUS board of directors, every board of regents, every CUS institution president, the
Synod President, and the CUS president all owe a duty of loyalty
and faithfulness to the Synod and its congregations. The boards
also have separate legal fiduciary duties: the Board of Directors
to corporate Synod, the CUS board to CUS, the boards of regents
to their respective university, the CUS presidents to their respective university, and the Synod President and CUS president to their
respective institutions. But they all also have a paramount responsibility to the Synod.
Failing to execute this responsibility to the Synod necessarily
constitutes a failure to execute their responsibilities to their respective entity. In other words, it is a fundamental duty of the Board of
Directors, the CUS board, each board of regents, each CUS institution president, the Synod President, and the CUS president to carry
out their responsibilities and duties in a fashion that is faithful to
the Confession, the Objectives, and the interests of the Synod. This
is emphasized in 2013 Res. 5-01A, 2016 Res. 7-02B, and 2019 Res.
7-03.
In Nov. 2019, the 2019 Res. 7-03 Committee held its first meeting and also held a joint meeting with the CUS institution presidents and boards of regents chairs. Following these initial meetings, the 2019 Res. 7-03 Committee met on a monthly basis from
Jan. 2020 until Feb. 2021. The committee made steady progress at
each of these meetings. A partial list of the work of the committee
included the following:

•

extensive research into the history of CUS, the unique history and circumstances of each CUS institution, historical
funding and long-term trends affecting funding and enrollment of CUS institutions, recent enrollment and funding
trends, demographics and finances affecting private colleges
and universities throughout the United States, among various other factors affecting the CUS institutions;

•

consideration of what has caused private colleges and universities initially established by Christian church bodies to
fail to continue to fulfill the original Christian mission of
the schools;

•

consideration of the impact of separation of a college or university from the governance structure of a Christian church
body on the Christian mission of the school;

•

consideration of information provided by the Higher Education Consortium describing various higher education governance systems;

•

preparing detailed meeting notes after every committee
meeting that were forwarded to committee members and
CUS institution presidents and board of regents chairs;

•

continual input from CUS institution presidents and board
of regents chairs;

•

extensive input from CUS and the CUS board of directors,
particularly with respect to the initial preparation of proposed Lutheran Identity and Mission Outcome Standards
(“LIMOS”) and the relationship of these standards to the
committee-proposed draft resolution;

•

drafting of a proposed resolution that was updated regularly,
with the updated draft circulated among the committee members and the CUS presidents and board of regents chairs;

•

consultation with Synod’s legal counsel; and

•

submission of draft overtures to the Commission on Constitutional Matters and the Commission on Handbook for their
review and consideration.

At the outset of its work, the committee decided to consider a
two kingdoms approach to a proposed new governance structure,
recognizing, of course, that this is often challenging. The committee frequently recognized and discussed these challenges when
proceeding with preparing a proposed new governance structure.
Generally, the committee concluded that it was preferable for CUS
to be given primarily right-hand kingdom responsibilities and that
the boards of regents be given more streamlined left-hand kingdom
authority and responsibilities. This effort to distinguish the two
kingdoms with respect to which institutions exercise what specific
authority and responsibilities is reflected in many of the recommendations ultimately made by the committee.

•

regular review of the requirements of 2019 Res. 7-03;

•

consideration of the accomplishments of, as well as the work
not completed by, the task forces appointed in conjunction
with 2013 Res. 5-01A and 2016 Res. 7-02B;

•

solicitation and receipt of input from all members of the
committee and all parties listed in 2019 Res. 7-03, among
others;

In Feb. 2021, the committee submitted to the Synod Board of
Directors a draft preliminary overture for consideration. The Board
of Directors considered the draft overture and gave it preliminary
approval. As required by 2019 Res. 7-03, the Board of Directors
then circulated the draft preliminary overture to the Synod at large
for comment and input.

•

consideration of an extensive focus groups study and report
of each of the CUS institutions conducted by an outside consultant that detailed the attitudes and opinions of the board

The committee received over 55 pages of comments expressing
a variety of perspectives regarding the draft preliminary overture
circulated by the Board of Directors from individuals across the

2023 Convention Workbook