Collection › LCMS Convention Proceedings (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2010 · 64th Convention, Houston › Page 160
LCMS Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 2010, Page 160
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
160
RESOLUTIONS
tradition and history of the current 35 districts of Synod . The
Blue Ribbon Task Force on Synod Structure and Governance
recognized the importance and immensity of this part of our
structure and recommended that a special task force be convened by the President of the Synod to work in consultation
with Synod’s Board of Directors and the Council of Presidents .
Whereas, Many expectations are put upon the districts
to provide support and resources to advance God’s kingdom
through healthy congregations . In an effort to bring the Synod
closer to the congregations, districts may become the primary
leaders in providing services (youth, stewardship, education,
and outreach), coordinating North American mission efforts,
leading North American human care ministries, providing
ministerial growth and support services, and giving worship
guidance and leadership; and
Whereas, “The Synod decides when and whether a district
shall be formed, divided, realigned, or merged with another or
other districts, or dissolved; determines the boundaries of a district; and approves the name of a district” (Bylaw 4 .1 .1 .3); and
Whereas, Any proposal for reconfiguration of districts initiated by the national convention of the Synod shall “include a
substantiated description of the nonviable aspects of the current district(s) on the basis of general principles of viability
adopted from time to time by conventions of the Synod, and
shall specify the problems or factors which make the adoption of the proposal advisable or necessary” (Bylaw 4 .1 .1 .3
[b] [3]); and
Whereas, General principles of viability have never been
adopted by conventions of the Synod; and
Whereas, A proposal for reconfiguration of districts is
to “provide a specific and realistic development plan for the
proposed district(s), including detailed proposals for staff personnel and financial operations” (Bylaw 4 .1 .1 .3 [b] [5]); and
Whereas, There is a need for careful, thoughtful, and
unbiased study of the function, size, and configuration of the
districts of the Synod; and
Whereas, The Atlantic, Eastern, New England, and New
Jersey districts have indicated their willingness to participate
as pilot districts for recommendations coming from a special
task force on district configuration, size, and function; therefore be it
Resolved, That the 2010 LCMS convention direct the
President of the Synod to convene a special task force to
work in consultation with the Council of Presidents and the
Synod’s Board of Directors to submit to the next Synod convention a recommendation that includes, but is not limited to,
the following:
• General principles of viability for a district as called
for in Bylaw 4 .1 .1 .3 (b) (3);
• The purpose and function of a district;
• Recommendations to improve efficiency and coordination between the Synod and districts and among the
districts, including possible changes in the number and
configuration of districts; and
2010 Convention Proceedings
• An implementation plan for any recommended changes
that will address staff personnel and financial operations, as called for in Bylaw 4 .1 .1 .3 (b) (5) .
and be it further
Resolved, That after the task force has completed its study
and determined the principles of viability, purpose, and function of a district, it be encouraged to work closely with the
Atlantic, Eastern, New England, and New Jersey districts in a
pilot program for implementing its recommendations for district configuration; and be it further
Resolved, That the work of the task force be done with great
care and sensitivity to the history and tradition of current districts, working cooperatively and collegially with each district;
and be it finally
Resolved, That the task force consist of 15 members:
• Appointed by the President of the Synod in consultation with the Board of Directors and the Council of
Presidents:
• Two representatives (one lay and one rostered member of Synod) from each of the five geographical
regions under the current district groupings of the
Council of Presidents
• One district executive
• One member of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on
Synod Structure and Governance
• One member of the Commission on Constitutional
Matters (CCM) selected by the CCM
• One district president chosen by the Council of
Presidents
• The Chief Mission Officer of the Synod
Action: Adopted (5)
(Res . 8-07 was introduced by the committee after replacing the
word “individual” with “rostered” in the final resolve . During discussion, an amendment was proposed to change “15” to “19” in
the first line of the final resolve and to add an additional bullet:
“One representative from the Atlantic, Eastern, New England, and
New Jersey districts as appointed by their district presidents .” The
motion to amend was defeated [Yes: 372; No: 752] . An amendment to change “15” to “16” in the same final resolve and to delete “One district president chosen by the Council of Presidents”
from that resolve, replacing it with “The district presidents of the
non-geographic districts” was also defeated [Yes: 474; No: 663] . A
proposed amendment to replace the third bullet in the first resolve,
“Based upon the principles of viability, purpose, and function of a
district, a recommendation for the number and configuration of districts” with new wording “Recommendations to improve efficiency
and coordination between the Synod and districts and among the
districts, including possible changes in the number and configuration of districts” was accepted as a friendly amendment . A motion
to amend the second resolve by replacing the words “the Atlantic,
Eastern, New England, and New Jersey districts” with “one district
from each of the five regions” was defeated [Yes: 234; No: 923] .
Res . 8-07 was adopted as changed [Yes: 693; No: 474] .)