LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 277

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

STRUCTURE, PLANNING, AND ADMINISTRATION 277

7-80

To Affirm CCM Opinion 02-2282

WHEREAS, On Aug. 20, 2002, the Synod’s Commission on Con-
stitutional Matters issued Opinion 02-2282, President’s Duty to
Call Up for Review, it concluded, on the basis of careful and thor-
ough review of Bylaw 2.27 and the Synod’s dispute resolution
process (Chapter VIII of the synodical Bylaws), that a President of
the Synod has responsibility to act in the event that he were to be-
come aware, before announcement of a decision of the Dispute
Resolution Panel under 8.09 c 4 d, that an investigating officer has
misstated a doctrinal position of the church or acted in violation of
the Constitution, Bylaws, or resolutions of the Synod; and

WHEREAS, The Commission cited Art. XI B 1-4 of the Synod’s
Constitution, adding: The President’s right and/or responsibility to
call up for review an action of an investigation officer carrying out
the responsibilities of Bylaw 2.27 c flows from his constitutional
responsibilities and powers; and

WHEREAS, Some in the Synod are questioning this ruling, as to
whether or not this action was proper; and

WHEREAS, The actions of the President of the Synod were ques-
tioned and challenged by an appeal to the Commission on Consti-
tutional Matters; and

WHEREAS, The actions of the President of the Synod were sus-
tained by the ruling of the Commission on Constitutional Matters,
as well as by the Dispute Resolution Panel (the ruling of the Synod
officer that was called up for review was overturned by the Dis-
pute Resolution Panel); and

WHEREAS, We support the President in the exercise of his du-
ties, and wish to encourage the members of the Synod to express
their support for the actions of the President of the Synod in this
matter; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Texas District of The Lutheran Church
—AMissouri Synod memorialize the Synod in convention to affirm
Opinion 02-2282 of the Commission on Constitutional Matters.

Texas District

7-81

To Affirm CCM Opinions

WHEREAS, It is reported that various overtures to the 2004 con-
vention have indicated that there is a desire by a minority in the
Synod to overturn certain Commission on Constitutional Matters
(CCM) opinions; and

WuereAs, The Synod’s Board of Directors in a meeting Nov.
21, 2003, took issue with eight opinions rendered by the CCM and
unconstitutionally declared them to be “of no effect”; and

WHEREAS, The Synod’s Bylaws state: “An opinion rendered by
the commission shall be binding on the question decided unless and
until it is overruled by a synodical convention “ (Bylaw 3.905 d)
and “it [The Board of Directors] shall have the right to call up for
review, criticism, modification, or revocation any action or policy
of a program board commission, or council, except opinions of the
Commission on Constitutional Matters” (Bylaw 3.183 d 2); and

WHEREAS, One of the functions that the Synod demands of the
CCM is to “interpret the Synod’s Constitution, Bylaws, and reso-
lutions upon the written request of a member (congregation, or-
dained or commissioned minister), official, board, commission, en-
tity, or agency of the Synod” (Bylaw 3.905 d); and

WuereAsS, A thorough and objective reading and study of the
CCM opinions and the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the
Synod demonstrate that the CCM opinions reflect accurate and ap-
propriate interpretations of the Constitution; Bylaws, and resolu-
tions of the Synod; and

WHEREAS, The CCM has demonstrated a servant attitude, ob-
jectivity, and faithfulness in the midst of undue pressure and very
trying times in the Synod during the last triennium; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod in convention gratefully affirm the
following CCM opinions: 01-2240, 01-2241, 02-2259, 02-2282,

02-2282A,B; 02-2304, 02-2294, 02-2296, 02-2309, 02-2311,
02-2313, 02-2320, 03-2357, 03-2358, 03-2359, and 03-2365.

St. Luke, Dix Hills, NY; St. Peter, Brooklyn, NY; Trinity,
Walnut Creek, CA; St. John, Hamilton, TX; Board of
Directors, Northwest District; Christ Our Savior, Coppell, TX

7-82
To Declare CCM Opinion 02-2282 Null and Void

WHEREAS, The Commission on Constitutional Matters in its
Opinion 02-2282 stated that “in fulfilling his duties, the President
would normally be expected (emphasis added) to rely on the provi-
sions of Chapter VIII of the Bylaws to correct errors occurring ...”;
and

WHEREAS, The use of the word normally indicates that the Pres-
ident is not mandated to obey the Bylaws, but may determine not to
if he regards the situation as not “normal”; and

WHEREAS, The Synod is the supreme interpreter of its own Con-
stitution and Bylaws; and

- WHEREAS, The Synod in convention adopted Res. 7-03C, which
reads, “Resolved, That we affirm the expectation that all officers,
staff members, and agencies of the Synod adhere to the Constitu-
tion and Bylaws of the Synod” and “That the President and Board
of Directors of the Synod shall see to it that the Constitution and
Bylaws of the Synod are observed”; and

WHEREAS, The opinion of the CCM in effect sets aside this res-
olution of the Synod by stating that “the President would normally
be expected to rely on the provisions of Chapter VIII of the By-
laws”; and

WHEREAS, Parliamentary law states, “Rules contained in the By-
laws cannot be suspended—no matter how large the vote in favor
of doing so, or how inconvenient the rule in question may be”
(Roberts Rules of Order, 9th edition, pp. 261-62); and

WHEREAS, The opinion of the CCM mentioned above violates
Res. 7-03C of the 2001 convention; therefore be it

Resolved, That Opinion 02-2282 of the CCM be declared null
and void; and be it further

Resolved, That the Synod again instruct all of its officers, staff,
and agencies that all bylaws of the Synod are mandatory and shall
be observed; and be it further

Resolved, That the Commission on Constitutional Matters be
instructed that it has no authority to legislate for the Synod, but
only to interpret the Constitution and Bylaws, in accord with reso-
lutions the Synod has adopted in convention; and be it finally

Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be submitted by the
Montana District as an overture to the 2004 convention of the
Synod.

Montana District

7-83

To Specify Synod President’s Duty to “Call Up
for Review” and Overrule CCM Opinion 02-2282

Rationale

On Aug. 20, 2002, the Synod’s Commission on Constitutional
Matters issued its Opinion 02-2282, “President’s Duty to Call Up
for Review.” It opined, with respect to Synod Bylaw 2.27 and the
Synod’s Dispute Resolution process (Chapter VIII of the Synod
Bylaws), that the “President of the Synod has responsibility to act”
in the event that he were to “become aware, before announcement
of a decision of the Dispute Resolution Panel under 8.09 c 4 d, that
an investigating officer has misstated a doctrinal position of the
church or acted in violation of the Constitution. Bylaws, or resolu-
tions of the Synod.” The Commission cited Art. XI B 1-4 of the
Synod’s Constitution, adding “The President’s right and/or respon-
sibility to call up for review an action of an investigation [sic] offi-
cer carrying out the responsibilities of Bylaw 2.27 c flows from his