Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 2019 · 67th Convention, Tampa › Page 175

LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2019, Page 175

Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

I. OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS
entire Synod had been removed (1873 Handbook, pp. 21–22).
However, it is clear that this change was not intended to alter
the supervision responsibility of the president of the Synod. Ultimate supervision for all those who are a part of the Synod still
remained with the President of the Synod.
The 1873 Handbook’s instructions state: “The Synod declares that, because the President of the Synod is appointed
inspector of the district presidents, the same right and power
would be attached (to him) in situations, where he is convinced
that a district president erred in his handling of a case, so that in
the local congregation involved, at his own discretion, he could
convince himself of the facts” (1873 Handbook, p. 89). The
change in wording was adopted by the 1864 convention (1864
Proceedings, p. 4, the proposal having been published in the August 15, 1863 Der Lutheraner). The reason for the change was
stated to be a result of the growth of the Synod, which made the
former general visitation duties impossible for the President of
the Synod to carry out. What did not change, however, was that
the ultimate responsibility for supervision still lay with the President of the Synod, and, if he was convinced that the district
president had erred in his handling of a matter, the President
of the Synod could go directly to the individual member or the
congregation. Thus the procedures the Synod adopted in 1956
simply reflect what had been the long-standing position of the
Synod, and were in no way a novelty.
The research of the commission leading to Op. 16-2791,
referenced only in part in the opinion, and the further research
reflected above fully support and in no way contradict the conclusions of Op. 16-2791.
Application of Bylaw sections 1.5.1.3, 1.5.2, and 1.5.7: In
regard to other issues raised by the member of Synod with regard to potential conflicts of interest, the CCM is well aware
of the conflict of interest provisions of the bylaws and of the
responsibility incumbent upon the CCM to review a potential
conflict of interest. Bylaws recognize that conflicts of interest
can occur, and place the responsibility on every board, agency,
or commission to determine whether or not a conflict of interest is present and the appropriate manner to proceed if such a
conflict of interest is found to exist (by vote of the other impartial members of that particular board or commission). However, an individual member of the commission may informally
explain an opinion, correct a misunderstanding of an opinion,
and provide sound (or challenge unsound) constitutional interpretations related to a pending resolution without conflict of
interest. (See, e.g., Bylaw 3.9.2.2.2, which requires commission
members to provide such guidance at convention floor committee meetings.)
It is still instructive to rehearse the relevant bylaws concerning conflict of interest, as the commission carefully considers and applies in this and every such instance:
1.5.1.3
Every board or commission member, officer,
and all staff of corporate Synod and every agency
of the Synod shall be sensitive in their activities to
taking or giving offense, giving the appearance of impropriety, causing confusion in the Synod, or creating
potential liability.

175

Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
1.5.2
Every board or commission member, officer,
and all staff of corporate Synod and every agency of
the Synod shall avoid conflicts of interest as described in this bylaw.
(a) Every agency shall implement the synodwide
conflict-of-interest policy, and that policy shall
be applicable to them and all staff operating
under them. This policy shall include the following provisions:
(1) Every board or commission member shall disclose to the chairman of
the agency and all staff shall disclose to
the chief executive or executive director
of the agency any potential conflicts of
interest. Each chairman or chief executive or executive director shall disclose
personal potential conflicts of interest to
the appropriate board or commission.
(2) Such disclosures shall include board
membership on, a substantial interest
in, or employment of the individual or a
relative by any organization doing business with corporate Synod or any of the
agencies of the Synod.
(3) Every board or commission member, officer, and all staff of corporate
Synod and every agency of the Synod
who receives honoraria or payments for
any sales or services rendered to corporate Synod or any of the agencies of the
Synod shall disclose such information.
(4) All such disclosures shall be reported
to the respective board or commission
to determine by a vote of its remaining
impartial members whether an inappropriate interest exists, and such vote shall
be recorded in its official minutes. In the
case of officers, all such disclosures shall
be reported to the President of the Synod to determine whether an inappropriate interest exists.
(b) Responsibilities shall be carried out in a manner reflecting the highest degree of integrity
and honesty consistent with the Scriptures, the
Lutheran Confessions, the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod, the policies
of corporate Synod and the agencies of the
Synod, and civil laws.
(1) Activities shall not be entered into
which may be detrimental to the interests
of the Synod. Any inappropriate activity
shall cease or the position will be vacated.
2019 Convention Workbook