LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2007, Page 319

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

general oversight responsibility for all the business and property of
the Synod.

According to Bylaw 3.3.5.4: “The Board of Directors shall be
responsible for the general management of the business and legal
affairs of the Synod...” Bylaw 3.3.1.1 states: “As the chief ecclesi-
astical officer of the Synod, the President shall supervise the doc-
trine taught and practiced in the Synod, including all synodwide
corporate entities.” And Bylaw 3.3.1.1.1 states: “The President of
the Synod has ecclesiastical supervision of all officers of the Synod
and its agencies, the individual districts of the Synod, and all dis-
trict presidents.”

Essentially, the basic issue raised in these three questions is
whether the Board of Directors has responsibility and authority
with regard to ecclesiastical matters. If it has any such authority,
such authority does not derive from Article XI F of the Constitu-
tion, under which the Board has been delegated authority with re-
spect to property and business affairs of the Synod. The Bylaws of
the Synod are similarly not the source of any such authority or re-
sponsibility. The authority granted under Bylaw 3.3.5, the general
grant of authority to the Board of Directors, again imposes respon-
sibilities with respect to the general business affairs of the Synod
but does not provide any general grant of ecclesiastical authority.
Rather, the Bylaws give different measures of the ecclesiastical au-
thority and/or responsibility to many others, including the Presi-
dent under Bylaws 3.3.1.1 and 3.3.1.3, the district presidents under
Bylaw section 4.4, and those involved in the termination of mem-
bership processes described in Bylaw sections 2.13 through 2.17.
Various ecclesiastical purposes of the church are also assigned to
some of the Synod’s program boards and commissions including,
for example, the Board for Pastoral Education, the Board for Com-
munication Services, the Commission on Doctrinal Review, and
the Commission on Theology and Church Relations.

The Synod also delegates authority through resolutions of its
conventions. In adopting such resolutions, the Synod has often rec-
ognized the distinction between business issues and those of an ec-
clesiastical nature. For example, as recognized in Opinion 02-2259,
2001 Resolution 7-03C charged the President and Board of Direc-
tors with specific responsibilities to see to it that the Constitution
and Bylaws of the Synod are observed but directed that, when a
failure to comply with the Constitution and Bylaws is discovered,
the President or Board of Directors, whichever is charged with su-
pervision or oversight, shall act to correct such failure to comply
as quickly as possible. Here, any failure of the Board for District
and Congregational Services regarding doctrinal issues would fall
under the responsibility of the President.

Analysis of the Challenged Resolution

It is not the responsibility or authority of the Commission on
Constitutional Matters in general to review resolutions of the Board
of Directors. The question presented, however, asks the Commis-
sion to interpret the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the
Synod to evaluate whether an action of the Board of Directors is
consistent with them. Unfortunately, the resolution of the Board is
fairly brief. Both whereas clauses refer to doctrine and practice and
to theological positions or articulations. If there are concerns re-
garding theological issues relating to the LCMS National Youth
Gatherings or, for that matter, any of the other programs operated
by the various boards and commissions of the Synod, those issues
must be addressed by the appropriate ecclesiastical supervisors and
those charged by the Synod with the responsibility for assuring
faithfulness in doctrine and practice. While as individual members
of the Board of Directors each member may find it appropriate to
express concern to the appropriate ecclesiastical supervisor and to
the involved board or commission itself, it is not appropriate for
the Board of Directors to supervise or critique the doctrine and
practice or the theological positions or articulations of such boards
or commissions.

Having made those general observations, however, the inquiry
is not complete. Bylaw 3.3.5.5 (a) (2) allows the Board of Directors
to call up for review the action or policy of any program board,
commission, or counsel, except opinions of the Commission on

319

Constitutional Matters. However, that authority to call up for re-
view is conditioned by paragraph (a) of that bylaw: “To the extent
of its responsibilities relative to the general management of and su-
pervision of the business and legal affairs of the Synod...” In the
Board resolution in question, the whereas clauses express concern
regarding doctrine and practice together with theological positions
and articulations. Those concerns do not fall within the “general
management and supervision of the business and legal affairs” of
the Synod. Rather than adopting such a resolution regarding theo-
logical concerns, it would have been more appropriate for the
members of the Board of Directors to have communicated their in-
dividual concerns to the Board for District and Congregational Ser-
vices and to the President of the Synod (to exercise his responsi-
bilities under Article XI B of the Constitution and Bylaw 3.3.1.1.1)
rather than to handle the matter through a formal resolution outside
the Board’s area of responsibility. Insofar as the subject resolution
requires the Board for District and Congregational Services to re-
port to the Board of Directors regarding theological matters, the
resolution exceeds the authority of the Board of Directors.

Financial Concerns of the Board of Directors

The second resolve of the Board’s resolution expresses con-
cerns regarding the potential liability or adverse financial conse-
quences connected with the future National Youth Gathering. Un-
fortunately, nothing in the whereas clauses articulates a basis for
this resolve. The Board of Directors is properly concerned with po-
tential liability and adverse financial consequences that may occur
by reason of the conduct of agencies of the Synod. In considering
that issue, however, it should be recognized that not all issues hav-
ing a fiscal impact upon the Synod are within the Board’s area of
authority.

For example, it is the President of the Synod who articulates in
a public fashion the positions of the Synod with respect to ecclesi-
astical issues. While there may be a reduction in contributions to
the Synod or to individual churches of the Synod by reason of a
public statement regarding the church’s position on abortion, the
role of women in the church, the inappropriateness of various fra-
ternal organizations, and many other topics, it is entirely outside of
the Board of Directors’ authority to restrict the President’s com-
munications in such areas. Similarly, the Commission on Theology
and Church Relations is charged with the responsibility of assisting
in maintaining doctrinal unity within the Synod and suggesting to
the Synod studies of contemporary issues, including current social
issues as they affect the church and as the church may affect such
social issues. Certainly, a number of those studies and activities of
the Commission can have the effect of causing some persons to
leave the membership of the church or to choose not to become as-
sociated with the church. In the same sense, the responsibilities of
the Board for District and Congregational Services, including the
National Youth Gathering, are a program function of the church
delegated specifically to that Board. The Board for District and
Congregational Services is expressly charged by the Synod under
Bylaw 3.8.6 with the responsibility to determine the number and
nature of ministry areas necessary to meet expressed district and
congregational needs, to arrange and carry out a comprehensive
and effective program of Christian education (particularly as it re-
lates to the Synod’s children and youth), as well as to provide input
to assist those within the Synod that includes proper scriptural mo-
tivation in all gift programs.

Relationship of the Board of Directors and the
Board for District and Congregational Services

The Board of Directors is not authorized to interfere with the
Board for District and Congregational Services in the performance
of those functions delegated to it by the Synod in convention. The
final resolve of the resolution in question requests that the Board
for District and Congregational Services report to the February,
2006 meeting of the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors is,
under Bylaw 3.3.5.5, certainly responsible to hold the program
boards of the Synod responsible for funds allocated to them by the
Board. To the extent of its responsibilities relative to the general

2007 Convention Workbook