LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 1–2, 2013, Page 2

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

•
•
•

Page 7, “District Archivist” paragraph: There is no mention of how this position is filled.
Page 18, paragraph 1.0 “Name”: By calling the endowment fund “a separate entity,” it is unclear
whether it is incorporated. It will be helpful to describe how the endowment fund is a separate
entity.
Page 21, “Canada Corporation”: It will be helpful to include a preamble paragraph stating that
while the Canadian congregations of the English District are separately incorporated in Canada,
they are also nonetheless member congregations of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod and
subject to its Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions.

Upon review of the Employee Handbook of the English District, last revised in January 2009, the
commission offered no further recommendations, thanking the district for its cooperation in providing
these documents for review in accordance with Synod Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3.
186. Ohio District Board Governance Policies Review (12-2630B)
Upon request of the commission, the secretary of the Ohio District submitted its policy manual for
review, stating it to be “the statement of policy whereby we hold our district president accountable under
the Carver Model of non-profit governance.” Thanking the Ohio District for providing its governance
policies, the commission offered the following comments and recommendations.
•

•
•

•

Page 1: The commission intends to encourage all districts to include an introductory paragraph to
their policy manuals reminding of the relationship of districts to the Synod. The commission
suggests a paragraph such as the following: “As a result of the Synod’s division of itself into 35
districts, districts such as the Ohio District remain component parts of The Lutheran Church—
Missouri Synod (Bylaw 1.3.2), each district of the Synod performing the functions of the Synod
(Synod Bylaw 4.1.1.1). Therefore the Synod is not merely an advisory body in relation to these
districts but has established them to achieve its objectives and carry on its activities more
effectively (Bylaw 4.1.1). The Constitution of the Synod is also the constitution of each district
and the Bylaws of the Synod are primarily the bylaws of the district (Bylaw 4.1.1.2). Districts are
also obligated to carry out the resolutions of the Synod (Bylaws 1.3.6; 4.1.1.1) and honor any
policies adopted by the Board of Directors of the Synod for its agencies (Bylaws 3.3.4ff.).
Districts such as the Ohio District also adopt additional bylaws and regulations necessary for
their own administration in carrying out the work of the Synod, as follows in this policy manual.”
Section 1, paragraph 1.4: This statement must also include mention of all resolutions adopted by
a Synod convention (Bylaw 4.1.7).
Section 2, paragraph 2.1.3.3: This paragraph should be clarified regarding the intended meaning
of the term “office,” whether it here refers to general day-to-day district office administration or
whether it speaks of the president’s administration of his ecclesiastical office, in which case the
one to whom he must give assurance of his performance is the President of the Synod (Synod
Constitution Art. XI B 1 d; Bylaw 4.4.2 [b])).
Section 2, paragraph 2.2.1.1: Mention should also be made here of the inclusion in the vision of
the board the mission and ministry emphases adopted by Synod conventions for each triennium
(Bylaw 4.4.2 [a]).

187. SELC District Bylaws Review (12-2631B1)
With a letter received November 5, 2012, the president of the SELC District provided documents showing
his district convention’s actions in response to the commission’s earlier recommendations for bylaw
changes. The commission thanked the district for providing these latest documents and noted that many of
345