LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — December 5, 1992, Page 2

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

of the institution and by doing so jeopardize other programs in the Synod.) In the future, of course, it will
be the Council on Mission and Ministry which has the responsibility for the allocation of undesignated
funds to the budget.
In its evaluation, the Commission considered the merits of the action taken by the Board of Directors as
being outside its purview. It also did not believe that it was appropriate to comment on the wisdom of the
timing of the action which was taken. On the narrow issue of the authority, the Commission concludes
that the Board of Directors did have the authority to take the action which it did being responsible for the
legal, fiscal, and property matters of the Synod and for the protection of the Synod as a whole in these
areas. The Board of Directors apparently concluded that prudence required that it take the action which it
did in transferring the personnel, an action which obviously also effected transfer of the editorial function.
10. Commission on Worship (Ag. 1936) : The Commission on Worship addressed the request for an
opinion to the Commission on Constitutional Matters regarding the apparent conflict between Res. 2-02 and
Res. 4-02A, both of which were adopted at the 1992 convention of the Synod. It believed that the question
to be answered was which resolution ultimately applied to the continued existence of the Commission on
Worship beyond the 1995 convention. Res. 2-02, according to the Commission on Worship, was drafted
and submitted with the understanding that the Commission on Worship was not to be included in any
reorganization proposal which would eventually result in the elimination of an independent Commission on
Worship, an action which would result from the implementation of Res. 4-02A. The Commission on
Worship argued that when the question was asked on the floor of the convention, an opinion only of one
person was given stating that Res. 2-02 would apply during the current triennium and 4-02A would apply
afterward. Its view was that this response does not answer its concerns because it was the response only of
an individual, not a member of either Floor Committee 2 or 4. It was further the position of the Commission
on Worship that if this were the intention of the drafters of Res. 2-02, that resolution would have been
superfluous since 4-02A was not intended to affect the status of the Commission on Worship during the
current triennium.
The Commission on Constitutional Matters determined to respond as follows:
In considering the two resolutions, the Commission first states that it is not in a position to determine the
intention of either the committees or the drafters of the resolutions. Furthermore, since the opinion which
was offered by an individual from the floor of the convention regarding the relationship of the two
resolutions was apparently not contested by either committee, it could well be argued that the convention
took its actions with the understanding which had been offered.
The Commission on Constitutional Matters notes that Res. 2-02 does not specify for what period of time
the Commission is to be retained as a self-standing committee. The fact has not been taken into account
that there were efforts to eliminate the Commission on Worship even during the 1989-92 triennium or to
have it absorbed in other units and that Res. 2-02 could very well be responding to that effort, ensuring
that the commission would be retained as a self-standing commission for at least the next triennium. In
view of this, it does not appear that Res. 2-02 was or would have been superfluous.
In summary, while the convention agreed that the Commission on Worship should remain as a selfstanding committee, it did not say that it should continue to do so even if and when a conference of
Congregational Services is constituted. Since each convention of the Synod has a right to determine
matters of this kind, if the Commission on Worship continues to believe that it should be a self-standing
commission, it may present a resolution to the 1995 convention calling for that action. In any event, it
does not appear that the establishment of a commission or a resolution regarding its continuation would
mean that the Commission would continue in perpetuity. A convention of the Synod obviously has the
right to terminate the existence of any board or commission which it has constituted at its own discretion.