We ran across some motions that will be brought before the Rocky Mountain District convention this June. Here is one that wisely asks the synod to slow down the process for considering the structural changes proposed by the Blue Ribbon Commission. (For more on the Blue Ribbon Commission click here.) We agree with the spirit of this motion and hope the synod will slow down this express. Consider this proposed motion and let us know what you think.
For Reasonable Conversation and Consideration of Changes to Structure
Whereas conversation, dialogue, consideration, and encouragement should always be rejoiced in and supported in our Synod, and,
Whereas proposals for serious and profound changes in our Synod’s practice and structure should be freely discussed, debated, and considered by all, and,
Whereas all our districts should allow for reasonable opportunity throughout all our districts for free and open review, dialogue, and conversation regarding the profound changes being proposed for our Synod’s practice and structure, and,
Whereas the BRTFSSG has succinctly stated the concern by helpfully alerting the Synod that the proposals
“involve proposed changes to parts of the Synod’s Constitutionâ€”changes too lengthy and detailed to be described adequately in the task force’s presentations at the district conventions” (“Introductory Note,” of the BRTSSG’s document for proposed changes),
Whereas most congregations and pastors and circuits are being exposed to the BRTFSSG proposals only shortly before their own respective District conventions, and many aren’t even being exposed to them until their own district conventions, and even then the proposals they are exposed to aren’t clear and final, but are often ambiguous and are presented as being in flux, and,
Whereas clarity and consistency are needed in the documents to be considered by the Synod in order to have serious consideration and beneficial conversation and dialogue, and,
Whereas the BRTFSSG’s own documents give proposals and recommendations that are often inconsistent, even in conflict with themselves, so that within the same documents the reader is confronted with serious ambiguities and contradictions, for example,
- In the “Walking Together, Presentation Format” from the LCMS website, power-point slide 17 proposes that “Commissioned Ministers” be considered to be “members of synod” alongside ordained pastors, yet slides 27 and 28 recommend that at conventions these same “Commissioned Ministers” would be treated the same not as ordained pastors but, rather, as lay persons; or,
- BRTFSSG’s “Walking Together” document, slides 20-22, recommends a change in the name of synod, even stating the rationale, while the BRTSSG’s document “Provisional Proposal” recommends the opposite, stating that “The name of the synod organized under this constitution shall be: The Lutheran Churchâ€”Missouri Synod”),
Whereas reasonable time and place and opportunity has not be given and established for beneficial debate, dialogue, discussion, and mutual consideration of the serious and profound changes to our Synod’s practice and structure (as found in the recently released but still not final proposals of the BRTFSSG),
Resolved, that the Synod establish a time period and a method in which these profound changes to practice and structure may be openly considered throughout the Synod, so that all may be allowed the time and opportunity to review and consider the work of the BRTFSSG, and,
Resolved, that since there is not enough time to have a substantial and meaningful conversation in preparation for the 2010 convention on clear and consistent proposals, the final work be clarified and presented to the next Synodical convention following the 2010 convention.