Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2010 · 64th Convention, Houston › Page 277
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2010, Page 277
front matter 1
front matter 2
front matter 3
front matter 4
front matter 5
front matter 6
front matter 7
front matter 8
front matter 9
front matter 10
front matter 11
front matter 12
front matter 13
front matter 14
front matter 15
front matter 16
front matter 17
front matter 18
front matter 19
front matter 20
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
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224
Page 225
Page 226
Page 227
Page 228
Page 229
Page 230
Page 231
Page 232
Page 233
Page 234
Page 235
Page 236
Page 237
Page 238
Page 239
Page 240
Page 241
Page 242
Page 243
Page 244
Page 245
Page 246
Page 247
Page 248
Page 249
Page 250
Page 251
Page 252
Page 253
Page 254
Page 255
Page 256
Page 257
Page 258
Page 259
Page 260
Page 261
Page 262
Page 263
Page 264
Page 265
Page 266
Page 267
Page 268
Page 269
Page 270
Page 271
Page 272
Page 273
Page 274
Page 275
Page 276
Page 277
Page 278
Page 279
Page 280
Page 281
Page 282
Page 283
Page 284
Page 285
Page 286
Page 287
Page 288
Page 289
Page 290
Page 291
Page 292
Page 293
Page 294
Page 295
Page 296
Page 297
Page 298
Page 299
Page 300
Page 301
Page 302
Page 303
Page 304
Page 305
Page 306
Page 307
Page 308
Page 309
Page 310
Page 311
Page 312
Page 313
Page 314
Page 315
Page 316
Page 317
Page 318
Page 319
Page 320
Page 321
Page 322
Page 323
Page 324
Page 325
Page 326
Page 327
Page 328
Page 329
Page 330
Page 331
Page 332
Page 333
Page 334
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS
Reductions in Force (09-2567)
In an e-mailed letter dated October 19, 2009, a Dispute Resolution
Panel submitted the following request for an opinion.
Question: Could the provisions of Bylaw 3.8.3.8.7 of the LCMS be
used as a model throughout the Synod in implementing
reductions in force?
Opinion: Bylaw 3.8.3.8.7, like Bylaw 3.8.2.7.7, lists “reduction
of the size of staff in order to maintain financial viability in compliance with policies concerning fiscal viability” as an allowable
cause for the termination of faculty positions by the boards of regents of the Synod’s institutions of higher education.
The intention of these bylaws stated in the 1989 convention action
that introduced “reduction in force” into the Bylaws of the Synod,
that is, to provide “guidance to boards of regents regarding termination of faculty or staff positions at synodical colleges and seminaries
because of external institutional circumstances which do not reflect on
the competency or faithfulness of individuals holding the positions”
(1989 Res. 6-10 “To Add Bylaw 6.44 re Termination of Position”).
The provisions of Bylaw 3.8.3.8.7 (and 3.8.2.7.7) were not specifically intended to be used as a model throughout the Synod in implementing reductions in force. However, the Synod has recognized
the right of other entities to eliminate positions no longer deemed
necessary by the hiring entity.
Adopted Oct. 31–Nov. 1, 2009
Application of Bylaw 3.8.8.2.2 to Recognized Service
Organizations (09-2568)
In a letter dated September 26, 2009, a pastor of the Synod requested an opinion of the commission regarding the application of the
Board for Mission Services Bylaw 3.8.8.2.2 to Recognized Service
Organizations of the Synod. He asked the commission to take into
consideration Bylaws 1.2.1 (a) and (d) and 6.2.1.
Question: Does Bylaw 3.8.8.2.2 in the Board for Mission Services
section of the “Program and Service Boards” section of
the 2007 Handbook of The Lutheran Church—Missouri
Synod apply to Recognized Service Organizations of the
Synod?
Opinion: Bylaw 3.8.8.2.2 states that the Board for Mission Services
“shall serve as the only sending agency through which workers and
funds are sent to the foreign mission areas across the Synod.” This
includes calling, appointing, assigning, withdrawing, and releasing “missionaries (ordained and commissioned ministers) and other
workers for the ministries and areas within its direct responsibility”
(paragraph [a]). This also includes “serv[ing] as the sending agency
even though programs are supported by districts or other agencies”
(paragraph [b]). The question posed is whether a Recognized Service Organization (RSO) is one of the “other agencies” mentioned
in the bylaw.
In 1993 the commission responded to a similar question, i.e.,
whether then-Bylaw 3.809 c (2007 Bylaw 3.8.8.2.2) applied to “organizations independent of the Synod, such as the Association of
Loyal Lutheran[s], Northwest, Inc.,” an organization consisting of
persons who were members of Missouri Synod congregations. The
commission responded as follows:
It is obvious that the Synod cannot control the actions of individual
members of member congregations of the Synod. The Synod can, however, expect congregations and pastors to act in conformity with the
bylaw.
With this in mind, the commission concludes that while it is not specifically contrary to the Bylaws for individuals or organizations made
up of individual members of member congregations of the Synod (other
277
than rostered church workers who are members of the Synod) to send
missionaries, it is entirely contrary to the spirit of the bylaw. However,
the bylaw does apply to organizations or entities, whether or not related
to or sponsored by Synod, whose membership includes members of the
Synod, i.e., rostered church workers of LCMS congregations. This conclusion is indicated by Bylaw 2.39 a–c [2007 Bylaw sections 1.7 and
1.8].
It should finally be noted that there is nothing which prevents actions being taken by groups such as those referred to above if those
actions are coordinated through the Board for Mission Services which
then, in effect, becomes the sending agency.
(The commission notes that while the bylaw in question has been
re-numbered, the language of the bylaw has not changed and the
above-quoted opinion has not been overruled by a convention of
the Synod.)
Synod Bylaw 2.11.1 (k) gives a Recognized Service Organization the right to call rostered workers and gives such workers the
right to remain on the roster of the Synod. At the same time, Bylaw
3.8.8.2.2 requires that the Board for Mission Services “serve as the
only sending agency through which workers and funds are sent to the
foreign mission areas of the Synod.” To honor these bylaw rights and
responsibilities, the Board for Mission Services, acting under Bylaw
6.2.1 (c) which allows it to adopt additional policy, requires a commitment from the governing boards of its RSOs that before an RSO
calls rostered workers into foreign service, that RSO must consult
with and receive approval from the Executive Director of LCMS
World Mission. This is entirely in keeping with the Bylaws of the
Synod and the spirit of former CCM Opinion Ag. 1969. The answer
to the current question, therefore, is “yes,” Bylaw 3.8.8.2.2 does apply
to Recognized Service Organizations of the Synod.
Adopted Jan. 23–24, 2010
Regional Gatherings (09-2569)
In an e-mailed letter dated October 21, 2009, a pastor of the Synod
requested “an expedited opinion” on a series of questions regarding
“the proposed special meetings the Synod President has called prior
to the 2010 convention.”
Question 1: Are the proposed regional “gatherings” in regards to the
work of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Synod Structure
and Governance to be considered “special sessions of
the Synod,” as defined/explained in Article VIIIB of the
Synod’s Constitution? Or are they something else? If
not “special sessions of the Synod,” under what section
of the Constitution or Bylaws does the President of the
Synod call these meetings? If these meetings do not
fall under the category of a regular Synod convention,
or a special session of the Synod, by what authority are
the districts assessing their circuits for the cost of these
meetings?
Opinion: These are not “special sessions of the Synod” as defined in the Synod’s Constitution. Nor are they early “sessions”
of the 2010 convention. These are informational meetings to be
attended by those invited, especially the elected voting delegates
to the 2010 convention. Synod Bylaw 3.1.9 places the responsibility “for the overall organization and operations of the conventions
of the Synod” on the President of the Synod. If he determines that
convention business is of such significance and/or complexity that
it will require pre-convention informational meetings, calling and
arranging such meetings is his prerogative.
Question 2: May informational meetings designed to assist delegates understand the issues, such as these are described,
preclude alternate delegates or interested visitors
from attendance? If so, based upon what part of the
2010 Convention Workbook
2010 Convention.indb 277
4/15/10 2:40 PM