LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 1–2, 2013, Page 4

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

•

Handbook IV D, final paragraph: The need for employees to provide signed statements annually
(Synod Bylaw 1.5.2 [c]) should be mentioned.

190. Review of Gemeinnützige Concordia International GmbH Corporate Document (12-2658)
In an October 23, 2012 email, the commission was asked to review the corporate document of a newly
formed German entity, Gemeinnützige Concordia International GmbH, a corporation intended to provide
the LCMS with means to operate and fund operations in Eurasia. After an initial review during its
November 2–4, 2012 meeting, the commission obtained further information before providing the
following response.
The commission grants its approval to the documents received so long as this entity has no staff at the
present time. If the entity has or obtains staff, further review will be required, since compliance with
Bylaws 1.5.5ff. will be necessary.
191. Concordia Asia Educational Foundation Corporate Documents Review (12-2658A)
When requested to review the corporate document of Gemeinnützige Concordia International GmbH (see
Ag. 191 above), the commission noted that it also had not reviewed the Missouri non-profit corporation
Concordia Asia Educational Foundation (CAEF) corporate documents, the corporate agency through
which the Synod was incorporating the German corporation. The commission took this opportunity to
review the CAEF documents and offers the following recommendations regarding its Bylaws document.
•

•
•

Bylaws Article II, Section A: This paragraph will need to be updated to reflect the change in the
title of “Treasurer” to “Chief Financial Officer” (also in III A, III E, etc., as necessary) and the
change from “Board for Missions Services” to the “Board for International Mission” (also Article
V, V D, etc., as necessary).
Bylaws Article III, Section F: If or when this corporation has staff, this paragraph must include
reference to Bylaw 1.5.5ff. responsibilities.
Bylaws Article IX: This paragraph must also include the mention of the Synod Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (a)
requirement for advance review and approval by the Commission on Constitutional Matters.

192. Dispute Resolution Process Representation (12-2661)
In a letter dated December 1, 2012, a district church extension fund submitted a question to the
commission regarding representation of its board in the dispute resolution process of the Synod. After
obtaining additional input as required by Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (b), the commission provided the following
response.
Background
A dispute having arisen between a congregation member of Synod (as complainant) and a separate church
extension fund established by a district (as respondent), the parties attempted to resolve their differences
with the assistance of a reconciler. Unsuccessful in this regard, the parties requested empanelment of a
dispute resolution panel.
Prior to this panel having been selected and officially formed, a question arose as to who should be
present on behalf of the church extension fund as a party before the panel. The church extension fund had
identified an individual to appear as their representative who had been a member of the board of the
347