Collection › LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1995–1998 › Page 2
LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — April 3, 1997, Page 2
Source: LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters minutes, file copy
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
101. Authority of the President (Ag. 2073): A request had been received from the Board for
Communication Services for a ruling on the following questions:
1)
Do the Constitution and/or Bylaws of The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod allow the President
of the Synod to exercise executive powers when he has not been expressly invested with such power for
a specific purpose (Bylaw 3.103, b)? If not, by whom must such power be invested in the President for
him to exercise said powers?
2)
May the President, for example, exercise censorship over the official periodicals of the Synod? If
so, what are the limitations, if any, to such authority in view of Bylaw 12.01?
3)
A variety of specific examples could be cited that would be affected by the issues raised above.
They would not be limited to the following, but could include these: May the President direct that no
"Letters to the Editor" be published on a given subject? may he direct that no articles be published on a
given subject? Conversely, may he direct that an article (as opposed to an "official notice") on a given
subject must be published? May he direct that an article or portion of an article be published in a
specific form, with no deviation in wording or content?
The Commission had also received a communication from the President of the Synod, in which it was
pointed out that the decision to direct the editor not to publish certain things was made not by the President,
but by the Praesidium. It was made because it believed that this matter concerned the ecclesiastical
supervision of the President of the Synod over the District President. The conclusion was that to allow a
response to an official announcement regarding activities related to ecclesiastical supervision would permit
dissent from positions of the Synod without following the proper procedures established for that dissent. It
was also stated that because "The President has the supervision regarding the doctrine and the
administration of ... all such as are employed by the Synod," in unusual circumstances the President would
have the right and duty to insist that a matter be handled in a certain way so that the Constitution of the
Synod would be respected, in regard both to the disciplinary action that had to be taken, the integrity of the
doctrines and practices of the Synod, and those of the Synod for dissent. It was also stated that while it was
unusual to instruct the editor of the Reporter not to print something, or to deal with an issue in a certain
manner, such a directive or request was not totally unique and had been imposed on other occasions.
Several incidents were cited which it was felt fell into this category.
In an attempt to provide assistance in preparing an opinion on this matter, the Secretary had proposed the
following:
1)
The Bylaws do allow for the exercise of executive powers by the President of the Synod even
when he has not been expressly invested with such power for a specific purpose. Bylaw 3.103, b,
cannot be read apart from Bylaw 3.103, c, which speaks to the issue of exercising executive power for a
purpose for which there is no specific directive. Prior to such exercise of power, however, the President
must consult with one of the four groups identified, namely, the Praesidium, Board of Directors,
Council of Presidents, or Council of Administrators, whichever he judges to be most appropriate. As
noted in the final sentence of 3.103, c, "Any member of the Synod shall have the right to appeal to the
convention of the Synod from his action."
2)
Bylaw 12.01 would appear to grant the Board for Communication Services the right and the
responsibility to assure the fact that the official periodicals "serve as a forum for the responsible
exchange of opinion on issues confronting the Synod." The question therefore revolves around the
judgment of what constitutes a responsible exchange of opinion on issues confronting the Synod" and
what is "general church news of interest to the Synod." Based on the response to the question above, the
President could conceivably exercise executive power if he judges that material such as that referred to