LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 278

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

278 STRUCTURE, PLANNING, AND ADMINISTRATION

constitutional responsibilities and powers.” The Synod should con-
sider this opinion of the Commission on Constitutional Matters and
the idea it expresses. ;

A New Idea. The Commission’s interpretation is a new idea.
Supposedly, it is grounded in the Synod Constitution, Art. XI B
1-4. Yet past Presidents of the Synod serving under the same con-
stitutional provisions have not cited them as rationale, for exam-
ple, to call up for review decisions of District Presidents resulting
in members of the Synod being suspended. Past Presidents of the
Synod and others realized that this sort of action would not be ap-
propriate.

A Premature Idea. Within the established Dispute Resolution
Process, it is premature for a President of the Synod to call up for
review an investigating officer’s action before a Dispute Resolu-
tion Panel has completed its work. Any knowledge of such a case
that a President might gain at a premature point could turn out to be
incomplete and even misleading. Therefore the Synod has speci-
fied the time for its President to carry out his duties with respect to
matters in dispute resolution—after the decisions of Dispute Reso-
lution Panels are finalized. If a question of doctrine or practice is
involved, Bylaw 8.09 d adds the Synod President to the list of those
who may request reconsideration. The same Bylaw also authorized
him to request an opinion of the Commission on Theology and
Church Relations (if he fears that theology went awry as the case
was handled) or an opinion of the Commission on Constitutional
Matters (if he thinks that the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod
were misread).

A Confusing Idea. The language “call up for review” is not
found in Synod’s Constitution, which the Commission cites. Rather
it comes from Bylaw 3.101 B 5, adopted by the Synod in 1998
upon recommendation from the “blue ribbon” Committee on Struc-
ture. For clarity’s sake, that committee had restated Bylaw 3.101,
dividing the President’s powers and duties into three clusters: those

‘that are ecclesiastical in nature, those that are administrative in na-
ture, and those that are both ecclesiastical and administrative.
Bylaw 3.101 B 5, which says that the President shall “call up for re-
view any action by an individual officer, executive, or agency
which, in his view, may be in violation of the Constitution, Bylaws,
and resolutions of the Synod,” falls under his “administrative” du-
ties. Thus, in 1998 the Synod did not apply the President’s “call up
for review” power to ecclesiastical matters such as decisions in
pending dispute resolution cases. For the Commission on Consti-
tutional Matters now to apply this language to these very matters is
to overlook distinctions the Synod itself has made. Confusion re-
sults where the Synod has striven for clarity.

A Changed Idea. Before the “blue ribbon” committee’s restated
Bylaw 3.101 was adopted by the Synod in 1998, the Commission
on Constitutional Matters approved its constitutionality. But now
only four years later, in its Aug. 20, 2002, opinion the Commission
has set forth a new reading of the Synod Constitution, under which
this Bylaw could not be approved for adoption as it stands. For the
Bylaw to fall into line with the Commission’s changed reading of
the Constitution, its “calling up for review” point would, at mini-
mum, have to be reclassified as both ecclesiastical and administra-
tive. The Constitution’s wording has not changed since 1998, nor
has that of Bylaw 3.101, yet the Commission has changed its opin-
ion. This changed opinion stands in need of correction by the
Synod; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Missouri District of The Lutheran Church
—AMissouri Synod submit the following resolution, together with
the above rationale, to the 2004 convention of the Synod; and be
further

Resolved, That the Synod reaffirms its intention, expressed in
current Bylaw 3.101 B 5, to situate the Synod President’s authority
to “call up for review” within the administrative sphere of his pow-
ers and duties, not in the ecclesiastical sphere, and therefore the
President’s constitutional powers do not include calling up for re-
view the decisions of investigating officers before the decisions of
the appropriate Dispute Resolution Panels have been announced;
and be it finally

Resolved, That the Synod in convention overrules Opinion 02-
2282 of the Commission on Constitutional Matters.

Missouri District

7-84
To Review CCM Opinions 02-2282 and 02-2309

WHEREAS, There is much discussion within The Lutheran
Church—Missouri Synod concerning the appropriateness of the
Commission on Constitutional Matters Opinions 02-2282 and 02-
2309; and

Wuereas, The Handbook gives the Synod convention the right
to “overrule” such opinions; therefore be it

Resolved, That the Minnesota North District request the Synod
at its 2004 convention to review these decisions to decide whether
they are in accord with Scripture and the Handbook.

Minnesota North District

7-85

To Require Parish Experience
for Praesidium and District Presidents

WHEREAS, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod was orga-
nized for the following objectives (among others):

* To conserve and promote the unity of the true faith (Eph. 4:3-6;
1 Cor. 1:10), work through its official structure toward fellowship
with other Christian church bodies, and provide a united defense
against schism, sectarianism (Rom. 16:17), and heresy;

¢ To strengthen congregations and their members in giving bold
witness by word and deed to the love and work of God the Fa-
ther, Son, and Holy Spirit, and extend that Gospel witness into all
the world;

‘¢ To recruit and train pastors, teachers, and other professional

church workers and provide opportunity for their continuing
growth; and

Wuereas, The President of the Synod is to be an ordained min-
ister on the clergy roster of the Synod, charged with the supervi-
sion of doctrine and practice of the members of Synod; and

WuerEAS, The Vice-Presidents are to be ordained ministers on
the clergy roster of the Synod, charged with representing the Pres-
ident of the Synod or advancing to his office under certain circum-
stances; and

WHEREAS, The District Presidents are charged with supervision
over the doctrine, life, and administration of office of the ordained
and commissioned ministers of the Districts and the religious con-
dition of the congregational members of their Districts; and

WHEREAS, The ability to supervise doctrine and practice in the
church is learned not only in the formal education acquired in the
seminary, but also in the formative experience acquired in the
parish ministry; therefore be it

Resolved, That the 2003 Montana District convention memori-
alize the 2004 Synod convention to require every candidate for the
offices of Synod President, Synod Vice-President, and District
President to have served at least seven years in the ministry as
parish pastor, beginning with the election of District Presidents in
2006.

Montana District

7-86
To Identify “Visitation Circuits” in Bylaws

Historical Background

One of the main reasons originally given for the founding of the
LCMS was to help those who choose to be members to remain fully
committed to the Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions. To fa-
cilitate this priority, the founding convention in 1847 established six