My prior post about the post-restructuring version of LCC’s East District has attracted a couple of comments I’d like to address. For reference purposes, LCC East District’s current handbook and policy documents can be found on this page.
One comment on the CEF Investors Forum offered an alternative explanation about the 1/3rd membership quorum as referring to the number of members in the corporation as of the time the meeting took place. My response was that it could be read either way and a minor tweak to the wording would clear the whole issue up so there’s no opening for misunderstanding and/or argument.
This commenter also offered the following questions of concern:
To which positions do we elect the best candidates?
For a lay person: Is it better to elect them to the Regional Mission & Ministry Council or to the ED BOD?
For a clergyman: Is it better to elect them to be Regional Pastor or to be on the ED BOD?
Given what East District will become in 2019, it and Synod will need people with different skill-sets. IMO this makes the question more one of matching skills to needs as opposed to which organization gets the “best” candidates.
Pastor Schutz from scenic BC offered another comment on the blog post itself.
1. how can the purposes of the corporation not be changing (Article IV of the 2015 handbook) if the corporation will no longer deal with ecclesiastical matters (page 25 of the proposal, as you have highlighted above), since the purposes are explicitly ecclesiastical in nature?
My read of the current bylaws is that there’s nothing that prevents LCC East District the corporate entity from changing its purpose as long as proper procedure is followed and its membership approves of those changes.
2. if the corporation will not deal with ecclesiastical matters, why is membership contingent on membership in LCC, why are members of Synod still involved in meeting and voting, and why is there any requirement for clergy representation on the Board at all, never mind an equal number of clergy and laity?
If the current East District is morphing into an asset holding company for the explicit purpose of supporting LCC churches and schools, then one would want it to be under the supervision and governance of people knowledgeable of Synod. This would ensure its continued support of Synod’s objectives and to prevent it from becoming a secular organization like so many other church-started organizations have become in the past.
If we are going to still require our congregations, pastors, and deacons to be involved in the operations of four corporations instead of one, then the shortcomings of our restructuring are going to be even more magnified than they have been already.
To clarify – nothing in this document requires any pastor or church to participate in East District 2019.
Once these changes are adopted any grandfathered members can resign from it if they want. The ones that remain can participate in its activities at whatever level they want and is available. These changes are strictly about altering the corporation’s purpose and requiring it to source its governing body members from LCC’s membership rolls, it doesn’t impose a burden on the membership that requires them to do anything.
I would also note that in this new structure East District 2019’s focus and work will be dramatically narrowed which should reduce the amount of work its governing body needs to do.