Collection › LCMS Convention Workbook (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1998 · 60th Convention › Page 283
LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 1998, Page 283
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
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 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 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 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 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 281
Page 282
Page 283
Sheet 299
Sheet 300
Sheet 301
Sheet 302
Sheet 303
Sheet 304
Sheet 305
Sheet 306
Sheet 307
Sheet 308
Sheet 309
Sheet 310
Sheet 311
Sheet 312
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
Page 335
Page 336
Page 337
Sheet 353
Page 339
Page 340
Sheet 356
Page 342
Page 343
Page 344
Page 345
Sheet 361
Page 347
Page 348
Page 349
Page 350
Page 351
Page 352
Page 353
Page 354
Page 355
Page 356
Sheet 372
Page 358
Page 359
Page 360
Page 361
Page 362
Page 363
Page 364
Page 365
Page 366
Page 2
Page 368
Sheet 384
Page 370
Page 371
Page 372
Sheet 388
Page 374
Scan: The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
8. BLUE RIBBON COMMITTEE
8-01
To Adopt Report and Recommendations
of Blue Ribbon Committee
WHEREAS, The March 1995 Commission on Constitutional Mat-
ters ruled that the provisions of 1992 Res. 8-01A were invalid and
of no effect; and
WHEREAS, This has left the matter of the relationship between
Synodwide corporate agencies and the Synod unresolved; and
Wuereas, A high percentage of members on most of the gov-
erning boards of the Synodwide corporate agencies, as well as a
number of the Synod’s program boards, are not elected by the syn-
odical convention; and
WHEREAS, There is a lack of clarity among a number of execu-
tives who serve on these agencies and boards about their account-
ability to the synodical Board of Directors and synodical President;
and
Wuereas, There is also a lack of clarity about the proper roles
of Synod's officers and other key officials in relation to each other
and to the synodical President and Board of Directors; and
WHEREAS, The Blue Ribbon Committee has issued a report to
the Synod in October 1997 thoroughly explaining these problems
and proposing constitutional and Bylaw changes to resolve them;
therefore be it
Resolved, That the Synod hereby adopts the Blue Ribbon Com-
mittee report and its constitutional and Bylaw changes.
Christ, Oak Park, IL; Trinity, San Jose, CA; Holy Cross, Anita,
IA; Our Redeemer, Forsyth, IL; Our Redeemer, Peekskill, NY:
St. Paul, Brookfield, IL; Bethany, Fort Wayne, IN
8-02
To Adopt Report and Implement
Recommendations of Blue Ribbon Committee
WHEREAS, The Committee on Constitutional Matters has ruled
that the provisions of 1992 Res. 8-01A were invalid and of no ef-
fect; and
WHEREAS, This ruling has left the matter of the relationship be-
tween synodwide corporate agencies and the Synod unresolved;
and
WHEREAS, The present lines of administration and governance
between and among Synod and its entities are a hindrance to our
church properly and efficiently carrying out its work in furthering
the kingdom of God; therefore be it
Resolved, That the Synod hereby adopt the Blue Ribbon Com-
mittee’s report and implement its recommended changes to our
synodical Constitution and Bylaws.
St. Paul
Lockport, IL
To Urge Revision or Restudy of Report
of Blue Ribbon Committee on Structure
Preamble
In a day when management gurus like Peter Drucker and War-
ren Bennis speak of empowerment of the leadership in organiza-
tions and national corporations are listening, we are dismayed to
see the Blue Ribbon Committee suggesting greater control, espe-
cially by the office of the President, as a major component of its
recommendations. When the congregations and Districts of our
church are finally absorbing the findings of many denominational
studies—among them those sponsored by our own Synod—and
they are moving toward decentralizing both structures and the ad-
ministration of ministries, we are sorely disappointed to see the
Blue Ribbon Committee moving in the direction of greater central-
ization of power.
While we appreciate the recommendation to eliminate the
“chief executive officer” language in describing the duties of the
President, many of the examples we now cite push the functions of
the President’s office strongly in the CEO mode.
Examples
The dramatic expansion of Art. XI B, “Duties of the President.”
The power “to advise, admonish, and reprove” and the “use of all
means at his command to promote and maintain unity of doctrine
and practice in all the Districts of the Synod” would become a
much stronger description of “administrative oversight” in the new
proposal ... “to oversee all officers and employees of the Synod and
its agencies, the individual Districts and all District Presidents ...”
(p. 27).
The recommendation that the First Vice-President (who serves
the President) serve as the chair of the Board for Higher Education
(p. 23).
The recommendation that personally or by way of representa-
tive, the President has the option to attend any or all of the meetings
of the various program boards and synodwide corporate entity
boards (p. 9).
The elimination of the Treasurer as an elected officer of the
Synod. The Treasurer would be replaced by a Financial Officer ap-
pointed by the Board of Directors in consultation with the Presi-
dent (p. 11).
The recommendation of an administrative team led by the Pres-
ident and including the First Vice-President, the Secretary, and the
Administrative Officer and the Financial Officer (both of whom
are appointed with the concurrence of the President).
While revisions to meet contemporary needs are appropriate in
all organizations, we believe there was great wisdom in the separa-
tion of power and authority, the checks and balances of our
Synod’s early organizational structure. Election of boards and com-
mittees by synodical conventions and the election of ministry ex-
ecutives by the appropriate board or committee served to empower
creativity and ministry with minimum control by the Board of Di-
rectors or the President’s office. The Blue Ribbon Committee
seems to see such lack of control as the problem to be rectified.
We would like to see a greater emphasis on setting direction for
the mission of the church and Gospel motivation toward commit-
ment and unity rather than on micromanagement of the program
boards and agencies. It seems especially important for the Presi-
dent of Synod to model pastoral and servant leadership because too
many parish pastors are tempted to adopt more autocratic leader-
ship styles in their congregations.
Granted, some current coordinating groups seem cumbersome
and need revision, and granted that the relationships between the
Synod and the five incorporated entities mentioned in the report
need to be clarified, there are surely ways to accomplish these ob-
jectives without resorting to greater control and centralization
mechanisms.
In view of our concerns, we submit the following resolution:
Resolved, That we urge revision or restudy of the structural is-
sues dealt with in the Blue Ribbon Report with the view to resist
greater control and to model decentralization of structure with ap-
propriate checks and balances.
Board of Directors
Northern Hlinois District
8-04
To Reject Blue Ribbon Committee Report
WHEREAS, The Blue Ribbon Committee report seeks to change
Bylaw 3.101 a and remove the title “chief executive officer” from
the President of the Synod, stating on pages 8-9 of the report, para-
graphs 33 and 34, that the term CEO is “borrowed from business
and industry” and can be “a source of misunderstanding and con-
troversy”; and
283