How Issues Are Considered at the Churchwide Assembly

3 Entry Points

There are 3 entry points for issues to be considered at a Churchwide Assembly (CWA):  I.)  Council Recommendations,  II.)  Constitutional Amendments, and III.)  Memorials from Synod Assemblies.

 

The Weak Link

The weak link here is “Memorials” because they can be trumped by Constitutional Amendments (ie: nothing can conflict with the Constitution).  Church Council (CC) recommended Constitutional Amendments receive little attention because they are buried in a stack of Pre-Assembly papers, and are often presented en bloc and are rarely questioned.

 

Watch the Agenda’s Order

Watch for the possibility that Constitutional Amendments will show up on the Agenda prior to consideration of Memorials.  If this is allowed and certain Amendments are adopted without questioning, amending, or rejecting -- the possibility exists that certain Memorials could be declared out of order because of the Amendments passed just hours or days earlier.  Or, the ELCA leadership, if faced with choosing between an adopted Constitutional Amendment and an adopted Memorial that conflicts, will likely take their mandate from the former.  Voting Members should be prepared to question and amend Constitutional Amendments just as they would be prepared to address a Memorial.

 

Constitutional Amendments to Watch:

Section IV, of the Pre-assembly Handbook (page 63) has a section entitled: “Recommendations: Proposed Special Amendments Related to Reorganization.”  A short list of those that deserve scrutiny includes:

 

16.12.13 Approval of policies is shifted from program committees to the Churchwide Council

16.31 Augsburg Fortress will be a separate corporate entity in name only, but will function more like a subsidiary of the Churchwide offices because of  16.31.02.  Now, even though there is a board of trustees, the governance falls under the umbrella of the Churchwide Council (CC).

       This is a significant impact in the Renewing Worship publication, because authority is retained ‘in house’ and oversight is tightly controlled.

 

 

17.31.02 Lutheran Editor now elected by CC rather than current method by CWA.  Also adds provision for joint removal by Presiding Bishop & 2/3 of CC (removal currently covered in 20.11).

17.31.03 Lutheran editor now responsible to CC rather than CWA. 

17.41.03 Nominating process for Foundation” (formerly “Endowment Fund”) president is eliminated, & replaced by ‘ecclesiastical’ appointment.

17.51 Synods and CW are now able to borrow funds from the Mission Investment Fund. Why do Synods need to borrow funds?  And, especially, why does the Churchwide organization need to borrow from itself?  Are they preparing for a major hit?

17.61.01.d.  Cuts appeal process for decisions of Board of Pensions.  Authorization is now shifted to Chicago’s office.

17.61.03.b.  Presiding Bishop now has Advisory Status to Board of Pensions.  Thus, he has a direct connection to the Board of Pensions.

19.21.02 Floor nominations are stifled, thereby assuring that only ‘official’ nominations have any consideration.  Although in conflict with the heart of Robert’s Rules, the content allows for a convoluted and difficult alternative nomination process.

20.11 Cuts due process for removal of editor of Lutheran.  Removal process shifted to Pres. Bish. & CC (see 17.31.02).

20.61 Cuts appeals process for termination of the editor.

 

Many of the amendments above (in bold) have the effect of bringing power closer to the office of Presiding Bishop.  Why does Hanson need these amendments now?  Organizational centralization (whether corporate, government, or church) usually happens in times of trouble.

 

In light of where the ELCA has come with its constitution since its founding, many of these amendments ask us to trust ELCA leadership more than ever when trust is at an all time low.  Such amendments add up to a consistent closing of doors to the average ELCA member.

 

As these proposed amendments are being considered, we should be asking:  Even if we were the ones proposing these amendments, are they good for the ELCA?