# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1975_S213 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS 213 b. If a person charged as herein provided is a Dis- trict President or an officer of the Synod as distin- guished from District offices, the charge shall be ad- dressed to the synodical President, who shall follow the procedures heretofore outlined to be followed by the District President under Bylaws 5.03, 5.11, 5.13, and 5.25 hereof. c. When a person, including a District President, is removed from office, he shall not again be eligible for an office in the Synod or subdivisions thereof unless and until he shall have agreed to meet, support, and uphold the constitutional Bylaw requirements of the Synod to the satisfaction of the electing or employing agency of the Synod or subdivision thereof. 24. Res. 4-43 Size of Boards and Commissions New Orleans Res. 4-43 (Proceedings. 1973, p. 160) asked the committee to review “the number of members of each board and commission of the Synod.” The committee also reviewed the functions and responsibilities of some of the boards and commissions. Membership on these various boards and com- missions varies from a minimum of 3 to a maximum of 11. However, the committee feels that it would be premature to speak specifically about the maximum or minimum number of board and commission members at this time, because of the prospective mergers and further reorganization which may take place in the future. The committee also reviewed the reasons that prompted the Board of Directors to recommend to the New Orleans conven- tion that the Commission on Mission and Ministry in the Church be terminated. Cognizant of the fact that the Board of Directors is presenting the same proposal to the Anaheim convention, the committee reports to Anaheim that it takes no exception to the proposal of the Board of Directors. The committee has also ascertained that an ad hoc committee on World Hunger was created in 1969 (Proceedings. 1969, pp. 143 —44), separate from the Board of Social Ministry and World Relief, which exists for this and other purposes (Bylaws 13.01 to 13.09). The committee concurs, therefore, with the recommen- dation of the Board of Directors that the ad hoc committee on World Hunger be terminated and its work transferred to the Board of Social Ministry and World Relief, where it properly belongs and which already has a standing committee of its own on hunger as well as a full-time staff person for world relief, and second, that the Board of Social Ministry and World Relief be urged to step up its efforts and more aggressively alleviate the problem of world hunger. 25. Res. 10-14 A Communications New Orleans Res. 10-14 A endeavored to establish a Board for Communication, including the present components of the Division of Communications, in an effort to correlate and co- ordinate the communications activities of the various units, including also the Lutheran Laymen's League. The committee consulted on several occasions with the components of the Division of Communications in order to ascertain how and under what circumstances such a combined board could best be established. In these consultations and explorations the com- mittee felt that, even though a greater coordination in the communications effort of the Synod is highly desirable, no consensus was reached on how that coordination could be established. The fact that an increasing proportion of the costs of the Board for Lutheran Television will be shared by the Lutheran Laymen's League was also considered. In view of this complexity, the committee recommends to the Anaheim con- vention that the entire matter of the potential merger of the components of the Division of Communications be referred to a proposed task force on reorganization for further study. In addition, however, the committee also acknowledges the principle that there are different roles involved in the various groups currently comprising this division. Nevertheless, the committee believes that all of them must speak with a unified voice. II. A Structure for Tomorrow The structure of The Lutheran Church — Missouri Synod, in its basic principles, was established at the time of its founding in 1847. Uppermost in the minds of the founders was the concern to preserve their theological heritage, which they had learned to love and appreciate and which had served as one of the primary concerns for the establishment of the Synod as defined in Article II. Other of their basic principles, determining the course of their ‘‘walking together,”” were enunciated in Article II] and Article VI. No substantive changes have ever been made in these principles. In other aspects, pertaining to the form and structure, how- ever, the Synod has periodically reexamined its methods of operation and procedures — in its determination to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ as the only Savior, and in the compact of mutual responsibilities. It was faith which functioned and produced forms. The forms were changeable, but not the faith. During the past several decades numerous petitions and overtures have been presented to the conventions of the Synod to study its structure and organization. Some suggested minor improvements or modifications, while others requested studies of the fundamental relationship of the congregations, the Synod, and the units in between. It is within this context that the forms and structures have been reexamined and reevaluated regularly to determine whether a more responsive design of the relation- ships could not be structured for more effectively achieving the mission of the church in the 1980s. The doctrinal controversy in our Synod has provided prob- lems that were not visualized in setting up our present organiza- tional structure, with the result that these problems have not been dealt with as expeditiously as might have been desired. The present synodical structure continues to emphasize the autonomy and the responsibility of the congregation in all local matters and gives the Synod authority over doctrinal super- vision, pastor and teacher training, the broader aspects of mis- sion work, providing Christian literature, and monitoring church relations. Historically, all decisions relating to synodical matters have been made at the delegate conventions. The synodical President and the various functioning boards and commissions have been instructed at the conventions to develop and carry out certain projects and programs and are responsible to them. In the intervening biennia these agencies work out the directives of the conventions. If circumstances changed radically during a biennium, the agency could only report back to the next convention that the intended program could not be successfully completed. With the rapid pace of life in general, the changes in the political, economic, and moral conditions at an ever-accelerated rate, some programs, at times, could not move forward or adjust to the changing times as quickly as one might hope, since a deci- sion to move or amend had to wait until the next convention. Because of the historic role of the conventions, the officers, boards, and commissions need to refer their problems to an interim body for guidance and counsel. In this context the office of the synodical President, the com- mittee observes, is an important part and crucial to our synodical structure. His duties involve doctrinal supervision, administra- tive responsibilities to boards and staff, programatic leadership, church relations, and serving as the “chief executive officer” of the corporation. His authority, in spite of these responsibilities, to deal with normal and abnormal situations which arise, how- ever, is limited. If all fails, he can “tell it to the church.” The committee believes that responsibility and authority should be commensurate. The Synod traditionally has operated with the principle that when the church faces new challenges or specialized oppor- tunities, it establishes another board or commission responsible to the conventions. Presently there are some 40 such agencies, a reduction of some 30 within the last 10 years, who are account- able to the conventions. Some have large staffs with huge budgets: others have no staff and practically no budget. New Orleans Res. 4-43 and 5-28 ‘even more broadly and com- prehensively) asked the Committee for Reorganization to take all these matters into consideration, considering whether the lines of authority and accountability need to be strengthened, whether overlap and duplication of effort can be eliminated, whether it is possible to combine, consolidate, and even reduce the number of boards and commissions, and in doing this, to review the entire Constitution and Bylaws. Presently the Board of Directors tries to monitor all of the synodical boards and commissions, but since most are organized by a directive of the convention and are accountable to it, the authority of the directors consists in serving as ‘the legal representatives of the Synod and the custodians of all property of the Synod” (Consti- tution XI F 2), including management, coordination, and super- vision (Bylaws 2.77 to 2.90).