Wednesday, June 2, 2010

The Proposed Resolutions Are Out

The first issue of "Today’s Business" is out, and can be found here. It is the first of eight issues, which are designed to “facilitate the business of the 2010 convention of our Synod,” as well as put forth whatever it is that the Synod President would like you to know.

This issue contains “essential convention information, including the convention schedule, additional overtures, Part II of the President’s Report, special standing rules, and official announcements. Most importantly, it contains proposed resolutions to be considered by the convention.”

One thing the Synod President would like you to know is how a mountain of your district and congregational overtures were made to disappear. Here is his explanation:

A word is in order regarding overtures submitted to the Synod that do not appear in the Convention Workbook. Part of the responsibility of the Synod President in the process of overture review is dictated in the Bylaws of the Synod which read, in part:

The President of the Synod shall determine if any overture contains information which is materially in error or contains any apparent misrepresentation of truth or of character. He shall not approve inclusion of any such overture in the Convention Workbook and shall refer any such overture to the district president who has ecclesiastical supervision over the entity submitting the overture for action. (Bylaw; ref. 2001 Res. 7-04A)

Some overtures submitted for convention consideration contained such information. Therefore, these overtures were not included in the Convention Workbook and were referred to the respective district president, communicating to him the specific objectionable feature(s) of the overture. I did not suggest any specific action on the part of the district president.

Perhaps someone could pass a resolution which defines “information which is materially in error or contains any apparent misrepresentation of truth or of character,” because any reasonable person would be forced to conclude that, in this case, the definition was stretched beyond the breaking point.

For further reference, see my previous post "The LCMS Convention: Floor Committee Intrigue."

No comments: