# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2004_S356 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 356 , OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS this mean for the colleges/universities/seminaries and the policies of the BHE/CUS Board for oversight and governance? Are the agencies of Synod to ask permission from Synod’s Board of Di- rectors in order to do [their] work before it has processed with the BHE/CUS Board and staff? Is the BHE/CUS Board excluded from its role of oversight and governance of the institutions of higher ed- ucation?”), he asked the following “basic question”: Question: Should the institutions of higher education make di- rect communication with the executive director and chairman of the Synod’s Board of Directors, bypassing the BHE/CUS Board? What is the role of the BHE/CUS Board and its staff if this resolu- tion is applied. Opinion: Bylaw 3.183 c provides that the Board of Directors is “responsible for the general management of the business and legal affairs of the Synod.” It also assigns to the Board “general over- sight responsibility” for officers and agencies of the Synod for busi- ness and legal affairs, even when these have been “expressly dele- gated by the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod.” Bylaw 3.51 a defines “agency of the Synod” as “an instrumentality other than a congregation, whether or not separately incorporated, which the Synod in convention or its Board of Directors has caused or authorized to be formed to further the Synod’s objectives,” in- cluding “each board, commission, council, seminary, university, college, District, Worker Benefit Plans, and each Synodwide cor- porate entity.” Bylaw 3.187 requires that the Board of Directors also adopt an annual budget of the Synod (paragraph b). Bylaw 3.183 d gives to the Board the responsibility to allocate available funds to program boards, commissions, councils, and departments of corporate Synod and to hold them accountable. These entities are required to provide reports regarding operations and policies as requested by the Board (paragraph 1). The Board also has a right to call up for review, criticism, modification, or revocation any action or policy of one of these entities (paragraph 2). The Commission concludes that the Board of Directors has been given “general oversight responsibility” over the colleges, universities, and seminaries of the Synod as its agencies (see CCM Opinion 02-2259). As part of this general oversight, the Board has a legitimate interest in any contemplated action of an agency which results in the spending of funds beyond those currently budgeted or which will obligate future spending. By a request for such in- formation, the Board exercises its right to call up an action for re- view, but this request is to be made, in this case, to the BHE/CUS Board. The role of the BHE/CUS Board and its staff will be to pro- vide the requested information to the Board of Directors through its chairman and chief executive officer. Adopted Jan. 20-21, 2003 Right of a Board to Adopt a Doctrinal Statement (02-2316) In a letter dated November 1, 2002, a pastor of the Synod calls attention to the 2001 Report of the Church Growth Study Commit- tee, “For the Sake of Christ’s Commission” (2001 Workbook, pp. 442-50), noting that a proposed resolution to the 2001 convention of the Synod commending this study to Synod’s entities (Res. 3- 14) was not acted upon by the convention. For the record, the Com- mission notes that the convention placed this matter in omnibus Resolution B. The pastor asked following questions in its regard. Question 1: Does an individual board or commission have the right to adopt a doctrinal statement as its editorial position that has not been approved by the CTCR or a convention of the Synod? Opinion: Only the Synod in convention has the right to adopt doctrinal statements according to the process provided by Bylaw 1.09 c. Boards and commissions regularly identify materials that they find useful for their own purposes, but they must abide by the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod. Question 2: Can a board or commission refuse the transfer of a position cost and personnel to another board or commission on the basis of a failure to adopt an unofficial doctrinal position as its doc- trinal editorial statement? 2004 Convention Workbook Opinion: Boards of the Synod function according to the general regulations provided by Bylaw 3.69 and other pertinent bylaws, and according to the specific bylaws that govern their activity. Adopted Jan. 20-21, 2003 Status of District-Trained “Lay Ministers” (02-2322) A pastor of the Synod, in a December 26, 2002 e-mailed letter, asked for an opinion on the status of “lay ministers” who have completed a two-year course of study provided by the District and who have been commissioned and subsequently called by congre- gations of the District. Question: Can a person who has completed a District program for “lay ministers,” has been commissioned by the District, has been called by a parish of the District, and has had “the laying on of hands” be considered a church worker such as a DCE or Lutheran school teacher, and how does the status of such a person impact her service in the District or as a participant in conferences or as a delegate to conventions? Opinion: There is no inherent right to membership in the Synod, and the decision regarding qualification for a first call and mem- bership in the Synod is according to the terms and at the sole dis- cretion of the Synod (Bylaw 2.07). Individuals who wish to be members of the Synod as Ministers of Religion—Commissioned must first be declared qualified according to the provisions of By- laws 2.09-2.11 and placed and installed according to Bylaw 2.13. Until such time as the above requirements are met, membership on the roster of the Synod is not possible. The participation in lo- calized training or the use of terminology such as “lay minister” or the employment of some form of commissioning or calling or lay- ing on of hands do not qualify a person for roster status. Such non- rostered persons are laypersons and are therefore eligible for ser- vice on boards or commissions or as delegates to conventions of District or Synod as lay participants. Individuals who are interested in membership in the Synod are encouraged to pursue fulfillment of the requirements for rostered status through the Concordia University System (2001 Res. 7-13A). Adopted Jan. 20-21, 2003 Implications of District Membership for Board of Directors Membership (02-2323) A District President, in a December 21, 2002 letter, asked a se- nies of questions regarding the consequences of a member of the Board of Directors changing District membership to a District in which another member of the Board already resides. Question 1: If there are two current members serving on the Board [of Directors of the Synod], each elected from two separate Districts, and if one of these two individuals transfers to the District in which the other individual holds membership and, therefore, District representation, would this action in any way disqualify ei- ther persons from continuing to serve'on the Board, since they would both hold membership in the same District as a result of the transfer? Qpinion: Bylaw 3.181 a, in addressing membership on the Synod’s Board of Directors, states: “The Board of Directors shall consist of...four ordained ministers, one commissioned minister, and eight laypersons. No more than one of these 13 may be elected from one District.” First, there must be an understanding of synodical membership, which consists of congregations and of individual members, that is, ordained or commissioned ministers (Constitution, Article V). The Board of Directors consists of both individual members of the Synod and laypersons, all of whom are to be members of voting congregations (Article X B 1). Bylaw 2.41 indicates the District through which individual membership is held. An individual member who is serving a con- gregation in a given District or who is serving a District must hold synodical membership through that District (paragraph a), while an emeritus member has a choice of District membership, as para- graph e states: