# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2004_S7 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) SYNODICAL REPORTS 7 pute resolution. I commend to you the recommendations of this task force, which will come before the convention for approval. Biblical and Confessional Study of Matters That Divide the Synod Through it all, it has been apparent to me, and to many others, that continued and renewed theological conversation and biblical study are necessary to restore the synodical solidarity we all so deeply desire. As a result of my request that the Commission on Theology and Church Relations, in consultation with the Council of Presidents, plan and conduct theological convocations to study and discuss the position of Holy Scripture on matters of theological dis- agreement in our Synod, all 35 Districts of the Synod have con- ducted “theological convocations” during the past two years. Gen- erally, these have been two-day meetings of pastors and, in some cases, also educators and laity. Such conversation and study require expenditure of significant resources of time, energy, and money. The joint committee of the CTCR and COP that planned and conducted the first model convocation in Aug. 2002, in Phoenix (it’s a dry heat . . .), will soon begin planning a second round of convocations to be held in the coming triennium. I sincerely invite you to join me in prayer for the blessing of the Holy Spirit on these very important meetings. By the grace and power of Almighty God I pray that we in the LCMS will be able to re-establish the synodical solidarity, har- mony, concord, and trust we all so sincerely desire and seek. The Board of Directors and Commission on Constitutional Matters During this triennium, the LCMS Commission on Constitu- tional Matters (CCM) has rendered a number of official interpreta- tions (“opinions”), eight of which have been specifically and for- mally questioned by the Board of Directors (BOD), which declared these opinions “of no effect.” Some of these opinions have to do with ecclesiastical supervision and some have to do with the au- thority of the BOD in relation to program boards and the President of the Synod. As stated on a number of occasions, I understand the concerns of the BOD for protecting the assets of the Synod and protecting the Synod from litigation, liability, and vulnerability. I have also, on a number of occasions, indicated my concern with the adoption by the BOD of resolutions that appear to be in conflict with the Constitution and Bylaws of our Synod, specifically the following provisions: LCMS Constitution Article X Officers A. The officers of the Synod are: 1. A President; 2. Vice-Presidents, in line of succession, as prescribed by the Bylaws; 3. A Secretary; 4.A Vice-President~Finance—Treasurer not in line of succession; 5. A Board of Directors; 6. Other officers, as specified in the Bylaws. Article XI Rights and Duties of Officers A. In General 1. The officers of the Synod must assume only such rights as have been expressly conferred upon them by the Synod... 2. The Synod at all times has the right to call its officers to account and, if circumstances require it, to remove them from office in accordance with Christian procedure. B. Duties of the President 1. The President has the supervision regarding the doctrine and the administration of a. All officers of the Synod; b. All such as are employed by the Synod; c. The individual Districts of the Synod; d. All District Presidents. 2. It is the President’s duty to see to it that all the aforementioned act in accordance with the Synod’s Constitution, to admonish all who in any way depart from it, and, if such admonition is not heeded, to report such cases to the Synod. Bylaw 3.183 (Authority of the Board of Directors) The Board of Directors shall a. have the powers and duties which have been accorded to it by the Articles of Incorporation, Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod, and the laws of the State of Missouri. d. To the extent of its responsibilities relative to the general management and supervision of the business and legal affairs of the Synod: 2. It [the Board of Directors] shall have the right to call up for review, criticism, modification, or revocation any action or policy of a program board, commission, or council, except opinions of the Commission on Constitutional Matters. Bylaw 3.905 d (Functions of the Commission on Constitutional Matters) The commission shall d. interpret the Synod’s Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions upon the written request of a member (congregation, ordained or commissioned minister), official, board, commission, entity, or agency of the Synod. Such a request may be accompanied by a request for an appearance before the commission. An opinion rendered by the commission shall be binding on the question decided unless and until it is overruled by a synodical convention... The BOD, while not unanimous on these issues, has expressed its disagreement with and concerns about the referenced CCM opinions. The Board must take into consideration the laws of the State of Missouri when taking action to protect the Synod. Since CCM opinions do not (and should not) interpret civil law, the Board believes the referenced CCM opinions attempt to govern Board actions and decisions in a way not allowed by Missouri law, as interpreted by two legal opinions obtained by the Board from independent legal counsel. Another legal opinion requested by “a group of individuals . . . who love and support the Synod” (quote taken from that legal opinion) arrives at conclusions different from those obtained by the Board. The Board also believes the CCM, in drawing conclusions concerning the propriety of resolutions and actions of the BOD, has exceeded its function of interpreting the Synod’s Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions. With these concerns, legal opinions, and constitutional and Bylaw provisions clearly in mind, I have been and still am, as of the date of submission of this report, attempting to work patiently, pastorally, and evangelically to resolve this difficult matter. At a Feb. 7, 2004, joint meeting of the Council of Presidents and the Board of Directors, I re- quested a private conversation with the chairman of the BOD and the chairman of the Commission on Constitutional Matters, who was in the meeting at that time. Following our brief time together the two chairmen issued the following joint statement: “The chairman of the Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM) attended the second day of the meeting, during which discus- sion took place regarding decisions of the CCM which the Board of Di- rectors (BOD) believes to be contrary to the laws of the State of Mis- souri. The BOD will review its recent actions which declared such opinions of no effect. The CCM will again revisit those opinions ques- tioned by the BOD, taking into consideration the material presented at the meeting by the BOD as well as any actions coming from the next meeting of the BOD.” (Signed) Robert T. Kuhn and Walter F. Tesch It is my fervent hope and prayer that this matter can be prop- erly resolved, in accordance with the provisions of our Synod’s Constitution, Bylaws, resolutions, Articles of Incorporation, and the laws of the State of Missouri. In Part III of my report to the 2004 Convention Workbook