LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — April 1–2, 2016, Page 6

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

that the district is redefining the district president’s role to one of a nonvoting chief financial officer or
chief operational officer.
The Michigan District’s policy manual defines the district president’s roles as follows:
4.3 DISTRICT PRESIDENT'S ROLES
4.3.1

The district president has three distinct roles to fulfill in the district. Each of these roles defines a
particular relationship to the board and the district.

4.3.1.1 Official Representative of The Lutheran Church–Missouri Synod: In this role, the
district president speaks on all theological matters that concern the district. These
issues are solely the province of the district president within the district. As such the
district president provides:
4.3.1.1.1 Oversight of doctrine and practice
4.3.1.1.2 Ecclesiastical supervision of ministers of religion—ordained and commissioned
4.3.1.1.3 Dispute resolution
4.3.1.1.4 Representation at the Synod level for the Michigan District, its interests and priorities
4.3.1.1.5 Representation to the district of the interest and priorities of the Synod.
4.3.1.2 Member of the Board of Directors: In this role, the District President is an Advisory member with a
voice but not given a vote. (See Bylaw 7.4 b) [emphasis added]
4.3.1.2.1 Special meetings of the Board of Directors may be called by the President of the District, the
Chairman of the Board or any three (3) voting Members of the Board upon written notice to all voting
and advisory members. (See Bylaw 7.6)

While a portion of what is stated in the above section is in accord with Synod Bylaws 4.4.4–4.4.6, namely
that “the district president has ecclesiastical supervision”; and while it is true that “[t]he district president
is the chief executive of the district” (Bylaw 4.4.1), it is most certainly not true and in direct contradiction
of Synod Bylaw 3.3.1.3 (d) that the president is “not given a vote” on the Board of Directors. This further
contradicts Synod Constitution Art. XI E 1, “The Board of Directors shall consist of not fewer than seven
voting members, to wit: the President,…” and is in direct contradiction to Article XII 3 (“The officers of
the districts are: a. A district president…”) and Article XII 6, “All officers of the districts have the same
rights and duties as those outlined in this Constitution for the officers of the Synod but only insofar as
these apply to the district and only within the boundaries of their districts.” See also Synod Bylaw 4.3.1
which lists the district president as an officer of the district and in no way limits the district president to
being only an “advisory member.”
The final example that the commission will present is under “2.4 GOVERNANCE PROCESS,” where
policy 2.4.1 provides the governance philosophy:
2.4.1 Governance Philosophy
The Board shall govern with an emphasis on:
• missional vision rather than internal preoccupation,
• ends rather than means

While ends in accordance with God’s will are important, there are certain matters that have specific
means by which Synod has stated that the ends are achieved. For example, “1.10 Dispute Resolution of
the Synod” assigns specific roles to the district president and provides a very specific roadmap concerning
how disputes are handled. These procedures cannot be ignored in order to arrive at a preconceived end.
You might also consider an example of the careful distinction of roles and responsibilities elaborated by
the Synod Board of Directors in its policy manual. Although the Synod’s board delegates many of its
responsibilities to the chief administrative officer, if the district is interested in its board delegating its
responsibilities, it will need to delegate otherwise than to the district president, whose rights and duties
are the same as for the Synod’s president but only insofar as they apply to the district (Constitution Art.
CCM Minutes – April 1–2, 2016 – Page 120