Author Topic: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle  (Read 14686 times)

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13530
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #120 on: February 22, 2021, 10:39:26 AM »
But what if the intent was to challenge the LCMS position? In other words, have to district take it to synod? If the majority in a district disagree with the synod position, how should they express that if they are never allowed to vote on it?

As I said in my post, by making it an overture to the national convention. Otherwise, our 35 different districts could hold 35 different district positions - and that's not a synod.


Why not? My wife and I have some different positions, but we're still married. My brothers and I, my sons and I have some different positions, but we are still family.
Looking at your example of you and your wife having some different positions, but still married. But what, speaking in general and not specifically about you and your wife, a husband and wife held different positions on whether whether sexual fidelity was a part of their marriage commitment? If one held the position that husbands and wives should be sexually faithful to each other and the other held the position that sexual fidelity was unimportant, what are the odds the marriage will last?


Not all issues are equal.


I agree. So it is possible for there to be some differences among the 35 Districts and still be a synod.
Yes, differences are possible and do exist. But those differences are strictly limited. The way the LCMS is structured, Districts are not free to establish rules and regulations that contradict what Synod has established. Districts are not autonomous but are a subdivision of Synod.

From the Synod Bylaws 2019 Convention Handbook:

4.1.1 The Synod is not merely an advisory body in relation to a district, but establishes districts in order more effectively to achieve its objectives and carry on its activities.

4.1.1.1 A district is the Synod itself performing the functions of the Synod. Resolutions of the Synod are binding upon the districts.

4.1.1.2 The Constitution of the Synod is also the constitution of each district. The Bylaws of the Synod shall be primarily the bylaws of the district.
(a) A district may adopt additional bylaws, regulations, and resolutions necessary or proper for its own administration or for
effectively carrying on the work of the Synod. These shall not conflict with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.
(b) The bylaws and regulations of the district and any subsequent change therein shall be submitted to the Commission on Constitutional Matters of the Synod for review and approval.

A question is whether districts must have triennial conventions or whether they could agree to hold them virtually or not every three years.  In other words, based on 4.1.1.2 (a), it would seem to me the District could hold its convention virtually, even though the opinion on the national convention was that it was not envisioned as being virtual.  Now that the national convention has been delayed for a year, the districts might opt for something virtual next summer, no?  Just thinking ahead to virus variant 7 that we don't know about yet.  Our visitation circuit meetings have been zoomed for some time, and we passed an overture on to whenever the next conventions are held.  We are also, as a circuit, an extension of the district and therefore the synod. 

Dave Benke

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13572
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #121 on: February 22, 2021, 11:09:00 AM »
Dave, that is a good question, and one that has not yet been ruled on. My opinion would be that a virtual convention should be valid. But that is just my opinion. With my opinion and about $4.15 you could get a Caffe Latte Venti at most Starbucks.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Dave Likeness

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 5339
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #122 on: February 22, 2021, 11:23:07 AM »
It is possible to have a healthy parish which proclaims Christ through Word & Sacrament.
Indeed, the members of that parish witness the love of Christ in their community as they
worship the Lord and serve others,

It is also possible to have a dysfunctional Circuit, and an out of touch District, so that the
Synod loses its vital links to the individual parish. For a healthy Synod, we need healthy
Districts, healthy Circuits and healthy Parishes.

Besides District Presidents, and Circuit Visitors, and Parish Pastors, perhaps we need a
Wellness Doctor in each District whose sole purpose is to help keep Circuits and Parish
Pastors spiritually healthy.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 15106
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #123 on: February 22, 2021, 01:12:08 PM »
In the ELCA, it is part of the standard call to a parish pastor that the pastor participate in synodical and ELCA events and promote and encourage synodical and ELCA participation by the congregation they serve. Pastors who say “I don’t have anything to do with the Synod,“ are technically in violation of their call.
Retired ELCA Pastor. Parishes in Iowa, Nw York and New Jersey. LCA and LWF staff. Former journalist. Now retired, living in Minneapolis.

D. Engebretson

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 5016
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #124 on: February 22, 2021, 01:22:02 PM »
Dave, that is a good question, and one that has not yet been ruled on. My opinion would be that a virtual convention should be valid. But that is just my opinion. With my opinion and about $4.15 you could get a Caffe Latte Venti at most Starbucks.

If I remember discussions at our BOD meeting in my district, there are no provisions for virtual conventions, district or synodical.  On a practical note, given that a certain percentage of delegates are older and not very adept at internet access, one fear I would have is that it could easily disenfranchise these delegates. 
Pastor Don Engebretson
St. Peter Lutheran Church of Polar (Antigo) WI

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13530
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #125 on: February 22, 2021, 02:08:32 PM »
Dave, that is a good question, and one that has not yet been ruled on. My opinion would be that a virtual convention should be valid. But that is just my opinion. With my opinion and about $4.15 you could get a Caffe Latte Venti at most Starbucks.

If I remember discussions at our BOD meeting in my district, there are no provisions for virtual conventions, district or synodical.  On a practical note, given that a certain percentage of delegates are older and not very adept at internet access, one fear I would have is that it could easily disenfranchise these delegates.

I would answer you in detail, Don, but I have no idea how to use these dadgum machines.  What you could do is have youth delegates assigned to assist the seniors.  Preparing for the next generation. 

Riddle me this - If all the district board meetings are virtual (which they have been out here) and all the Council of Presidents meetings are virtual (and they have been) and all the circuit meetings are virtual (out here again) and business is being transacted, selections of leaders are being made when vacancies occur, prayers are being prayed, devotions being presented, and decisions regarding rostered members are being made - if all of that is true - and it is - then what is the hubbub and broccoli about conventions in terms of the mandate for in-person?

I believe our circuit will discuss and potentially pass on an overture to the district to get to the national level to make it possible for virtual conventions.  In a sense - think it through - had the decision been to allow virtual conventions when the question was asked a year or so ago, we would all be getting ready for a normal convention cycle right now, and would not have had to delay.  Boom.

Dave Benke

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13572
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #126 on: February 22, 2021, 03:25:38 PM »
One thing that I think has become apparent this past year, is that virtual meetings are not always a complete substitute for in person. Many things can be accomplished virtually and for some purposes a virtual meeting is quite adequate for the purpose and a time and money saver to boot. It is especially useful during this emergency when in personal meetings have been hazardous and often forbidden. Certainly better than not getting needed business accomplished.


District and Synodical Conventions are for more than just getting a number of resolutions decided. The Synod Bylaws (§3.1) state that "The national convention of the Synod shall afford an opportunity for worship, nurture, inspiration, fellowship, and the communication of vital information." Similarly, §4.2, for District Conventions. They are also "the principal legislative assembly, which amends the Constitution and Bylaws, considers and takes action on reports and overtures, and handles appropriate appeals." Some of that can be handled virtually, but not all.


I think that we would be the poorer if we abandoned in person meetings and do everything virtually on a regular basis. Having the ability to handle business virtually when that is necessary would be a very good thing. But not as a regular thing.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

Mark_Hofman

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #127 on: February 22, 2021, 03:52:29 PM »
In a sense - think it through - had the decision been to allow virtual conventions when the question was asked a year or so ago, we would all be getting ready for a normal convention cycle right now, and would not have had to delay.  Boom.

Dave Benke

Yes. The Black Swans in life can be a royal pain. (ref. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory)


peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 19820
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #128 on: February 22, 2021, 03:54:39 PM »
If remote conventions become normal, we’re owning up to the fact that fellowship and informal talk/meetings are not an important part of conventions.

DeHall1

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #129 on: February 22, 2021, 05:51:49 PM »
Dave, that is a good question, and one that has not yet been ruled on. My opinion would be that a virtual convention should be valid. But that is just my opinion. With my opinion and about $4.15 you could get a Caffe Latte Venti at most Starbucks.

If I remember discussions at our BOD meeting in my district, there are no provisions for virtual conventions, district or synodical.  On a practical note, given that a certain percentage of delegates are older and not very adept at internet access, one fear I would have is that it could easily disenfranchise these delegates.

I would answer you in detail, Don, but I have no idea how to use these dadgum machines.  What you could do is have youth delegates assigned to assist the seniors.  Preparing for the next generation. 

Riddle me this - If all the district board meetings are virtual (which they have been out here) and all the Council of Presidents meetings are virtual (and they have been) and all the circuit meetings are virtual (out here again) and business is being transacted, selections of leaders are being made when vacancies occur, prayers are being prayed, devotions being presented, and decisions regarding rostered members are being made - if all of that is true - and it is - then what is the hubbub and broccoli about conventions in terms of the mandate for in-person?

I believe our circuit will discuss and potentially pass on an overture to the district to get to the national level to make it possible for virtual conventions.  In a sense - think it through - had the decision been to allow virtual conventions when the question was asked a year or so ago, we would all be getting ready for a normal convention cycle right now, and would not have had to delay.  Boom.

Dave Benke

My apologies Bishop Benke -  I read your first sentence and this was the first think I thought of...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxlPGPupdd8&feature=youtu.be

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13530
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #130 on: February 22, 2021, 06:11:16 PM »
Dave, that is a good question, and one that has not yet been ruled on. My opinion would be that a virtual convention should be valid. But that is just my opinion. With my opinion and about $4.15 you could get a Caffe Latte Venti at most Starbucks.

If I remember discussions at our BOD meeting in my district, there are no provisions for virtual conventions, district or synodical.  On a practical note, given that a certain percentage of delegates are older and not very adept at internet access, one fear I would have is that it could easily disenfranchise these delegates.

I would answer you in detail, Don, but I have no idea how to use these dadgum machines.  What you could do is have youth delegates assigned to assist the seniors.  Preparing for the next generation. 

Riddle me this - If all the district board meetings are virtual (which they have been out here) and all the Council of Presidents meetings are virtual (and they have been) and all the circuit meetings are virtual (out here again) and business is being transacted, selections of leaders are being made when vacancies occur, prayers are being prayed, devotions being presented, and decisions regarding rostered members are being made - if all of that is true - and it is - then what is the hubbub and broccoli about conventions in terms of the mandate for in-person?

I believe our circuit will discuss and potentially pass on an overture to the district to get to the national level to make it possible for virtual conventions.  In a sense - think it through - had the decision been to allow virtual conventions when the question was asked a year or so ago, we would all be getting ready for a normal convention cycle right now, and would not have had to delay.  Boom.

Dave Benke

My apologies Bishop Benke -  I read your first sentence and this was the first think I thought of...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxlPGPupdd8&feature=youtu.be

That is absolutely amazingly funny!  I had to do a virtual hearing before a judge like that, and it was way weird, but without the morphed kitten. 

Dave Benke

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13530
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #131 on: February 22, 2021, 06:13:11 PM »
If remote conventions become normal, we’re owning up to the fact that fellowship and informal talk/meetings are not an important part of conventions.

Oh, no.  When the weather is fine, we're going to push for the Lutheran Fair.  No doubt about that.  In pandemia, remote.  In Elysian fields, we grill and vote.

Dave Benke

John_Hannah

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 5724
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #132 on: February 22, 2021, 06:58:40 PM »
If remote conventions become normal, we’re owning up to the fact that fellowship and informal talk/meetings are not an important part of conventions.

Oh, no.  When the weather is fine, we're going to push for the Lutheran Fair.  No doubt about that.  In pandemia, remote.  In Elysian fields, we grill and vote.

Dave Benke

Who provides the beer?    :D

Peace, JOHN
Pr. JOHN HANNAH, STS

Dave Benke

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13530
    • View Profile
    • Atlantic District, LCMS
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #133 on: February 22, 2021, 07:17:15 PM »
In a sense - think it through - had the decision been to allow virtual conventions when the question was asked a year or so ago, we would all be getting ready for a normal convention cycle right now, and would not have had to delay.  Boom.

Dave Benke

Yes. The Black Swans in life can be a royal pain. (ref. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory)

This is an important post.  First, the quote including the then-deemed-non-existent black swan is the very quote from Juvenal that begins "rara avis," the rare bird.  Secondly,  when Hus, the original Gray Goose, prophesied that a century after the goose was gone a swan would appear, and it was Luther, Luther himself was that rare bird.  Although not deemed a black swan originally (although they had always existed, the first black swan was not identified - "discovered" - by a European until almost 1700), the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Guyana has the Swan as its mascot.  And in recent times, the swan has been referred to as a Black Swan, since the membership of the ELCG is over 90% people of color.  It's on the ELCG hymnal, which I use for house blessings and bhajans like Yissu Ne Khaha, Jiwan Ki Roti.

Your reference, though, gives ear to the real reason Luther is the Black Swan - he was the game-changer, the one who flipped the script. 

In terms of the Synodical convention timing, of course, the script has already been flipped to add the extra year, which gives time for fellowship, reflection and fresh starts locally but hopefully all the way to the national level. 

We could try a true upsetment.  All of our other things that can be done as a group could be like the Lutheran Fair, beer provided by Sponsorships.  The only thing we would retain virtually would be the business and election segments of conventions.   With the Zoom thumbs up-thumbs down button.  That would be a true and durable game-changer. 

Dave Benke

Terry W Culler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2423
    • View Profile
Re: 90% (!) Vote to Delay LCMS Convention Cycle
« Reply #134 on: February 22, 2021, 08:18:20 PM »
A friend of mine was the pastoral delegate from our community to the nation via de cristo conference last summer.  They did it remotely and it was something of a disaster.  People would make a motion and then other folks would seek to amend the motion, which of course requires agreement with the both the mover and the second, and nobody had planned how to deal with such things.  There is no good substitute for in-person conferences if anything important and/or subject to disagreement comes up.  IMO better to forego a conference than to try to do it over the internet.
"No particular Church has ... a right to existence, except as it believes itself the most perfect from of Christianity, the form which of right, should and will be universal."
Charles Porterfield Krauth