Principles for Restructuring Synod

Restructuring The Synod – Principles to Follow

As the members of the LC-MS await the report of the President’s Blue Ribbon Task Force on Structure and Governance, some Principles should guide our consideration of any proposals to change the Structure of the LC-MS.

– Christian A. Preus, Esq., Member of LC-MS Board of Directors from 1995 to 2007

The Principles that should guide any restructuring are as follows:

I. Keep the Good

1. First and foremost any changes must maintain and promote the fundamental reason for the existence of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod: to serve the Members of the Synod (that is: the Congregations and Pastors and other church Workers).

a. This fundamental purpose of the Synod is currently reflected in Article III of the Constitution which lists the 10 objectives of the Synod. These 10 objectives emphasize that the reason for the existence of the Synod is to strengthen, aid, encourage, and protect the Congregations and their Members and the Pastors and other professional church Workers.

b. This fundamental reason for the LC-MS existence is also stated in Bylaw 1.1.1 – “The Synod is organized to work in support of and on behalf of congregations to assist them in carrying out their ministries as they seek to serve our Lord Jesus Christ, the members of His Body, and the world which stands in need of the Word and the impact of His redeeming love.”

c. The Synod exists to serve its Members.

d. The Members of the Synod do not exist to promote, perpetuate, or serve the Synod.

> Any effort that departs from this fundamental principle should be rejected.

2. Throughout its history, the LC-MS has acted through its Congregations, recognizing the Biblical basis of each Congregation, and on that basis treated all Congregations equally.

a. This is reflected in Article V of the Constitution, throughout the Bylaws, and in countless Convention resolutions.

b. The number of members of individual Congregations has never been the focus of the Synod’s structure or actions.

c. Congregations are dedicated to service, not to power or authority.

> Any effort that departs from this fundamental principle and gives greater influence or rights to select Congregations (whether based upon their size or other factors) should be rejected.

II. Avoid the Bad

3. There should be no changes to the Constitution of the Synod.
1. Any difficulty in the structure of the Synod does not in any way flow from the Constitution.
2. The difficulties exist in ambiguous, confusing, overly restrictive, and contradictory Bylaws.
3. Any effort to change the Constitution would interject a cumbersome, difficult and potentially divisive goal.
4. Any effort to change the Constitution would depart from the stated objective: to simplify and clarify the structure of the Synod.

> Any effort to change the Constitution should be rejected.

4. Any changes to the Bylaws must be consistent with the first objective stated in Article III of the Constitution, that is to “conserve and promote the unity of the true faith . . . .”

> Any effort to change Bylaws that would undermine this principle or promote, encourage, or make easier theological disunity in our confession and practice should be soundly rejected.

5. From its origin and continuously throughout its history, the LC-MS has been an instrument by which the Congregations can collectively carry out missions and the education of Pastors and other church Workers.

1. It is the Congregations that use the Synod to carry out their mission efforts and their education of Pastors.
2. Again, the Synod is an instrument of the Congregations.
3. The Congregations are not simply a resource for the Synod.

> Any Bylaw changes should maintain at the forefront the objective of the members of the Synod in these two vital areas.

> Any effort to re-categorize mission work and the education of Pastors as an effort of the Synod separate from the congregations should be rejected.

6. The officers, board members, and others carrying out their assigned tasks as determined by the Members of the Synod in convention and through the adoption of Bylaws should do so in an attitude of service to the Members.
1. Any and all efforts to further concentrate power (in the President or a select few officials) directly undermines the purpose of the Synod to serve the Congregations and individual Members.

> Any such efforts should be soundly rejected.

> Avoid all efforts to consolidate “power” or “authority,” especially in the office of the President.

III. Fix What’s Now Bad

7. Through time there has developed a “silo” environment in some parts of the Synod. Under this “silo” system some agencies operate and act as though they are a separate authority of their own, and not accountable ultimately to the Congregations of the Synod.

> Any Bylaw changes should promote a coordinated, orderly, and cooperative effort among the various agencies of the Synod.

> Any Bylaw changes that further promote the “silo” effect should be rejected.

> Instead, all efforts to promote and reestablish a coordinated, orderly, and cooperative environment, with full accountability to the Members of the Synod and the purposes and objectives of the Synod should be promoted.

8. “Let all things be done decently and in order” (1 Corinthians 14:40). “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities” (Romans 13:1).
1. As Lutherans, we recognize that “there is no authority except from God”“whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed,” “for rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad” (Romans 13:1-3). and that
2. We are blessed to live in a country that protects our freedom to practice our religion and operate a church organization.
3. Of course, as a Christian church organization we are obligated to follow the Word of God above the laws of man.
4. Fortunately, in our free country, we rarely (if ever) are forced to choose between the two.

> We should not abuse this freedom by disregarding or acting contrary to the laws of the land.

> Those current Bylaws that still do not completely conform to civil law should be changed.

> Any proposed Bylaw that does not conform with civil law should be soundly rejected.

IV. Make It Better

9. To the extent possible, changes should be made in the Bylaws to promote efficiency and excellence.

> Wherever waste and inefficiencies exist, efforts should be made to eliminate them.

> Wherever service to Members of the Synod is not excellent, efforts should be made to improve it.

10. As the Synodical structure has becomes more complicated and confusing, and the Bylaws more ambiguous and contradictory, the involvement, influence, and ultimate authority of the Congregations has diminished.
1. Any Bylaw change that diverts the focus away from the Synod’s service to the Congregations undermines the authority of the Congregations and the work the Congregations do collectively as a Synod.
   
2. Such changes instead increase the power or authority of officials.

> Any changes must be accompanied by simplification and clarification, not more bureaucracy and ambiguity.

> Any Bylaw change that is not simple and clear (so that no “interpretation” is needed, regardless of the intent or purpose) should be rejected until it is made simple and clear.