LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — December 11-12, 2000, Page 3

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

QUESTION 9:

“If a separately incorporated Lutheran school association has 100% LCMS
members, only LCMS congregations or individuals are the member owners, are
they required to obtain RSO status from the LCMS?”

Opinion: This question is addressed in the responses to the previous questions.
QUESTION 10: “What privileges does a separately incorporated Lutheran school association lose
if it chooses not to be an RSO of the LCMS?”
Opinion: See the Opinion to Question 8 above.
The Commission notes that the above opinions also provide response to the questions submitted by the
District President, specifically, does a recognized service organization have the right or privilege to
extend a Divine Call to a rostered worker of the Synod, or must a District President endorse such a
worker’s position in order to make it possible for him/her to retain “active” status in the Synod? (see
Opinion 3)
185. Report of the Commission on Structure (00-2206)
The Commission reviewed the Preliminary Report and accompanying materials provided by the
Commission on Structure (COS). After extensive discussion, the Commission on Constitutional Matters
(CCM) makes the following recommendations to the COS as that Commission prepares its final report to
the 2001 convention of the Synod.
The CCM acknowledges the good work done by the COS to rearrange the content of the Handbook to
provide for better order and usefulness. The CCM rejects, however, the premises of the COS that the
content of the Handbook of the Synod can be easily divided into Bylaw and Policy/Procedure sections
and that to do so will be beneficial to the Synod. The CCM reminds that the entire content of the current
Handbook was adopted as bylaws by conventions of the Synod. The CCM maintains that reduction of
these bylaws to an apparently lesser status will ultimately adversely affect the operations of the Synod.
The critical role and ability of the CCM to address questions and disagreements will either be hampered
or expanded due to lack of bylaw basis for decision-making, which in turn would adversely affect the
separation of powers that currently exists in the governmental structure of the Synod. Furthermore, such
reduction of status of major portions of current bylaws to policy and procedure may be predicted to lead
in due time to the removal of this material from the Handbook altogether, which will permanently hamper
the Synod’s ability to function as a synod with a clear understanding of how its members and entities
walk together.
The CCM also notes with concern that the COS is proposing that major sections be added throughout the
proposed Handbook to facilitate the division of bylaw and policy/procedure sections and that extensive
wording changes are being recommended, often without significant reason. Such unnecessary changes carry
the potential to adversely affect or even nullify decisions and rulings made over many years that have been
specifically based upon present wording. Such widespread and sweeping change to its Handbook alters the
very nature of the agreements under which the Synod operates.
Accordingly, the CCM makes the following recommendations to the COS for incorporation into its final
report:
ƒ
ƒ

The entire content of the proposed Handbook should be of the same font, style, and size of print
with the exception of the major headings identified by the numbered sections of the proposed
Table of Contents.
The italicized headings incorporated into some sections of the preliminary report can be
omitted because they are unnecessary and inconsistent.
192