# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2007_S319 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS general oversight responsibility for all the business and property of the Synod. According to Bylaw 3.3.5.4: “The Board of Directors shall be responsible for the general management of the business and legal affairs of the Synod...” Bylaw 3.3.1.1 states: “As the chief ecclesi- astical officer of the Synod, the President shall supervise the doc- trine taught and practiced in the Synod, including all synodwide corporate entities.” And Bylaw 3.3.1.1.1 states: “The President of the Synod has ecclesiastical supervision of all officers of the Synod and its agencies, the individual districts of the Synod, and all dis- trict presidents.” Essentially, the basic issue raised in these three questions is whether the Board of Directors has responsibility and authority with regard to ecclesiastical matters. If it has any such authority, such authority does not derive from Article XI F of the Constitu- tion, under which the Board has been delegated authority with re- spect to property and business affairs of the Synod. The Bylaws of the Synod are similarly not the source of any such authority or re- sponsibility. The authority granted under Bylaw 3.3.5, the general grant of authority to the Board of Directors, again imposes respon- sibilities with respect to the general business affairs of the Synod but does not provide any general grant of ecclesiastical authority. Rather, the Bylaws give different measures of the ecclesiastical au- thority and/or responsibility to many others, including the Presi- dent under Bylaws 3.3.1.1 and 3.3.1.3, the district presidents under Bylaw section 4.4, and those involved in the termination of mem- bership processes described in Bylaw sections 2.13 through 2.17. Various ecclesiastical purposes of the church are also assigned to some of the Synod’s program boards and commissions including, for example, the Board for Pastoral Education, the Board for Com- munication Services, the Commission on Doctrinal Review, and the Commission on Theology and Church Relations. The Synod also delegates authority through resolutions of its conventions. In adopting such resolutions, the Synod has often rec- ognized the distinction between business issues and those of an ec- clesiastical nature. For example, as recognized in Opinion 02-2259, 2001 Resolution 7-03C charged the President and Board of Direc- tors with specific responsibilities to see to it that the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod are observed but directed that, when a failure to comply with the Constitution and Bylaws is discovered, the President or Board of Directors, whichever is charged with su- pervision or oversight, shall act to correct such failure to comply as quickly as possible. Here, any failure of the Board for District and Congregational Services regarding doctrinal issues would fall under the responsibility of the President. Analysis of the Challenged Resolution It is not the responsibility or authority of the Commission on Constitutional Matters in general to review resolutions of the Board of Directors. The question presented, however, asks the Commis- sion to interpret the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod to evaluate whether an action of the Board of Directors is consistent with them. Unfortunately, the resolution of the Board is fairly brief. Both whereas clauses refer to doctrine and practice and to theological positions or articulations. If there are concerns re- garding theological issues relating to the LCMS National Youth Gatherings or, for that matter, any of the other programs operated by the various boards and commissions of the Synod, those issues must be addressed by the appropriate ecclesiastical supervisors and those charged by the Synod with the responsibility for assuring faithfulness in doctrine and practice. While as individual members of the Board of Directors each member may find it appropriate to express concern to the appropriate ecclesiastical supervisor and to the involved board or commission itself, it is not appropriate for the Board of Directors to supervise or critique the doctrine and practice or the theological positions or articulations of such boards or commissions. Having made those general observations, however, the inquiry is not complete. Bylaw 3.3.5.5 (a) (2) allows the Board of Directors to call up for review the action or policy of any program board, commission, or counsel, except opinions of the Commission on 319 Constitutional Matters. However, that authority to call up for re- view is conditioned by paragraph (a) of that bylaw: “To the extent of its responsibilities relative to the general management of and su- pervision of the business and legal affairs of the Synod...” In the Board resolution in question, the whereas clauses express concern regarding doctrine and practice together with theological positions and articulations. Those concerns do not fall within the “general management and supervision of the business and legal affairs” of the Synod. Rather than adopting such a resolution regarding theo- logical concerns, it would have been more appropriate for the members of the Board of Directors to have communicated their in- dividual concerns to the Board for District and Congregational Ser- vices and to the President of the Synod (to exercise his responsi- bilities under Article XI B of the Constitution and Bylaw 3.3.1.1.1) rather than to handle the matter through a formal resolution outside the Board’s area of responsibility. Insofar as the subject resolution requires the Board for District and Congregational Services to re- port to the Board of Directors regarding theological matters, the resolution exceeds the authority of the Board of Directors. Financial Concerns of the Board of Directors The second resolve of the Board’s resolution expresses con- cerns regarding the potential liability or adverse financial conse- quences connected with the future National Youth Gathering. Un- fortunately, nothing in the whereas clauses articulates a basis for this resolve. The Board of Directors is properly concerned with po- tential liability and adverse financial consequences that may occur by reason of the conduct of agencies of the Synod. In considering that issue, however, it should be recognized that not all issues hav- ing a fiscal impact upon the Synod are within the Board’s area of authority. For example, it is the President of the Synod who articulates in a public fashion the positions of the Synod with respect to ecclesi- astical issues. While there may be a reduction in contributions to the Synod or to individual churches of the Synod by reason of a public statement regarding the church’s position on abortion, the role of women in the church, the inappropriateness of various fra- ternal organizations, and many other topics, it is entirely outside of the Board of Directors’ authority to restrict the President’s com- munications in such areas. Similarly, the Commission on Theology and Church Relations is charged with the responsibility of assisting in maintaining doctrinal unity within the Synod and suggesting to the Synod studies of contemporary issues, including current social issues as they affect the church and as the church may affect such social issues. Certainly, a number of those studies and activities of the Commission can have the effect of causing some persons to leave the membership of the church or to choose not to become as- sociated with the church. In the same sense, the responsibilities of the Board for District and Congregational Services, including the National Youth Gathering, are a program function of the church delegated specifically to that Board. The Board for District and Congregational Services is expressly charged by the Synod under Bylaw 3.8.6 with the responsibility to determine the number and nature of ministry areas necessary to meet expressed district and congregational needs, to arrange and carry out a comprehensive and effective program of Christian education (particularly as it re- lates to the Synod’s children and youth), as well as to provide input to assist those within the Synod that includes proper scriptural mo- tivation in all gift programs. Relationship of the Board of Directors and the Board for District and Congregational Services The Board of Directors is not authorized to interfere with the Board for District and Congregational Services in the performance of those functions delegated to it by the Synod in convention. The final resolve of the resolution in question requests that the Board for District and Congregational Services report to the February, 2006 meeting of the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is, under Bylaw 3.3.5.5, certainly responsible to hold the program boards of the Synod responsible for funds allocated to them by the Board. To the extent of its responsibilities relative to the general 2007 Convention Workbook