Floor Committee 12 - Ecclesiastical Supervision and Dispute Resolution

[prsauer]

But first a presentation by the LCMS Ministry to the Armed Forces...

[prsauer]

Wonderful celebration of our many fine LCMS chaplains (Full disclosure: the ALPB Board President, John Hannah is a retired US Army Chaplain), and a reminder of synod's program to assist combat veterans as they return home, Operation Barnabas: http://www.lcms.org/page.aspx?pid=732

[prsauer]

This ecclesiastical supervision floor committee is one, which if information conversations are to be believed, where many of the more passionate discussions at this convention will take place.

Resolution 12-01A comes before the convention (unfortunately it is in Sunday's edition of Today's Business)

This is call for an overhaul of the suspension/expulsion practice by giving right of appeal to the President of Synod instead of a referral panel. This is the sticking point, which many DPs are uncomfortable about and has the potential to become a logistical nightmare. If an accuser doesn't get their way, why wouldn't they always appeal to the synodical president. In reality every dispute resolution case will either be decided in favor of the accuser or it will end up in the synodical president's office. What then, argue the DPs, is the point of having them even involved in the process. They further argue that our dispute resolution process was held up as a model by the US Supreme Court in Hosanna-Tabor. Why would we want to make changes now?

The argument being made by the floor committee chair is that the move to make appeals go to the praesidium and an appeals panel is an unconstitutional usurpation of the Synod President's authority. It isn't a centralization of power in synod so much as a restoration of constitutionally granted authority to the synodical president.

[prsauer]

It is my understanding that a number of DPs from across the church political spectrum will be going to the microphone to express concern about this. We shall see...

We shall also see if we ever get around to finishing the reading of this. Between this and that early resolution defining the ministry - we have spent about $20,000 or so listening to speakers. That is not Hillary Clinton to Goldman Sacs good - but still a hefty sum for to have someone read something that is already in front of us. (Yes Peter - I know fixed costs...)

[revjagow]

It is my understanding that a number of DPs from across the church political spectrum will be going to the microphone to express concern about this. We shall see...

I certainly hope so.  It is my understanding our DP's have worked a lot of things out through Koinonia.  I seriously want to get back to the attitude of talking through our differences rather than dealing through centralized authority and legislation.   

[prsauer]

Done reading - let the comments begin - the queue to speak is longer than the screen can accommodate... buckle up.

A call to hear from the COP.

Move to refer the resolution to the Council Of Presidents (COP) - Seconds come in bunches - many from COP seating.

Criticism that this was proposed by a task force of 4 people appointed by the president 3 of whom are in office by appointment of the president, and none of whom are engaged in ecclesiastical supervision.

Floor Committee Chair response: 2 COP members were on the Floor Committee which unanimously decided to bring this forward.

Now a new queue to speak about referral to the COP - and once again the queue quickly fills up. Will be addressed pro and con.

Again a call to hear how much the COP was involved since it most involves them. Response - it is not the decision of the COP. We give them the COP "Their Marching Orders"

[prsauer]

Criticism that the CCM ruling calling our current system unconstitutional just came out today. What about previous CCM rulings that held the constitutionality of things.

Criticism that we have had almost no opportunity to discuss this. Places members of synod in double jeopardy. Call for us to come to consensus and allow for broader discussion by referring it to the COP.

DP John Denninger speaks in favor of referral.  Wants us to have time to consider it, understand it. As a District President he wasn't even aware of the task force until he received his convention workbook, and the COP has had no discussions about the task force. - That seems to be a pretty serious breach of good order - that those who would be most affected by this are not consulted.

[revjagow]

Jon Denninger (my DP) - acknowledges that the President can call any task force he pleases, but some DPs had only even heard that there was a task force when they got the convention workbook.

Good job, Prez.!  I hope that helps to slow this ill-advised resolution. 

[prsauer]

Opposition - the floor committee has been working on this. People have had time to read this, why not deal with an issue that is "not going to go away."

Since we are so divided on this why wouldn't we refer this back to the COP and come to agreement on how to handle this.

"Concern about God's word being assaulted" which action serves the clarity of our confession of truth.

The CCM is at the microphone now explaining their interpretation of the bylaws defending their recent finding.

Motion to end debate on the motion to refer to the COP. 74% want to stop debate on the motion so we do.

Motion to refer fails 495-599.

[prsauer]

I am stunned at the failure to refer. That COP members were not consulted on the task force or even aware of its existence is unbelievable and does not speak well to current trust levels at this level.

Again a call to hear from the COP.

Again a call "To have this conversation" now. My question is if conversation was what was wanted why was this kept from the COP for so long.

[prsauer]

A motion to move this to the next floor committee 12 session so that the COP can give us some direction on this. This may be a moot point as we are down to about 5 minutes left in this time slot.

Call again to allow the COP to have a voice.

Motion to delay now goes before the convention. by 521-542 the motion to delay fails. We now have 2 minutes left.

Orders of the day is called so it comes back before the convention again tomorrow despite the previous failed vote.

[Matt Staneck]

A motion to move this to the next floor committee 12 session so that the COP can give us some direction on this. This may be a moot point as we are down to about 5 minutes left in this time slot.

Call again to allow the COP to have a voice.

Motion to delay now goes before the convention. by 521-542 the motion to delay fails. We now have 2 minutes left.

Orders of the day is called so it comes back before the convention again tomorrow despite the previous failed vote.

LOL. That's great.

M. Staneck

[prsauer]

And now we move on to celebrate missionaries and their families and a group of agitated delegates make their way to the bathroom. Resolutions demand our attention, honoring missionaries is a break. I get it... logistics. But I am saddened nonetheless.

[Matt Staneck]

Is ONM, which is doing great work by the way, implying that wives are (kinda sorta) called as missionaries to proclaim the gospel to.....women (only)?

M. Staneck

[prsauer]

Honoring missionaries is commendable and worthy of the delegates' attention.  Silly skits not so much.  No one need feel guilty about using the facilities at this time.

No disagreement - although folks started walking before the skit started and all that was listed on the orders of the day were "honoring missionaries". I guess it all works out.