Stigmata? "Rev. Matthew C. Harrison was elected by the 2010 LCMS convention as its next president. Election was 54% for Harrison on the first ballot. Matt gave a very humble and gracious acceptance speech which I am sure we will be posting soon. Pray for our synod as we go forward from here..."
You read it first on Ichabod, the prediction, the results.
I got the results from Facebook, true, but I posted it fast.
Read my astonishing prediction here.
Steadfast Lutherans on the election.
President
| Rev. Matthew C. Harrison |
| Elected with the majority vote on the ballot of election for president of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.
|
 | | Final Ballot | | Harrison | 643 | | Kieschnick | 527 | | Mueller | 8 | | Fickenscher | 5 | | Gard | 1 | |
---
Necessary Roughness
LCMS Message of Reconciliation On the Ropes
Back in January I attended the LCMS Model Theological Conference on Worship. We watched a presentation by Ted Kober on reconciliation and civil disagreement. It encouraged us to treat each other in Christian brotherly love as we sought to de-personalize disagreements and forgive each other when someone was harmed in our speech or other ways. It was a worthy start to a conference of such a contentious topic. I thought it was good that the message again was given at the beginning of the LCMS convention.
I watched a good deal of the LCMS in convention yesterday online. It seems that message of reconciliation is in jeopardy.
The debate rule adopted by the convention stipulated that people stepping up to the microphone in debate must alternate speakers that were for and against the proposal. There were at least 10 microphones on the floor where people could speak their mind. As the microphones filled up with people speaking against the proposals, the Chairman of the convention, the current Synodical President, kept polling the people at the microphone looking for a “pro” speaker. Finally a “pro” speaker would make it to the microphone, not to actually debate the proposals, but to call the question.
Now, one would think that an issue with so many “con” speakers and so few “pro” speakers would indicate a majority of votes against the proposals. But, no. The proposals passed by very small margins of victory. 51.4% of the convention voted to make vice presidents come from regions. The resolution to completely do away with the LCMS’s board structure won with 51.91% of the vote.
The convention has over 1000 voters in convention. Surely some of the over 500 apparent “pro” voters would want to convince others to vote with them! But, no. Almost nobody from the “pro” side would discuss their views, leaving the “con” side by rule to stand in lines at the microphone safely out of the discussion. This happened several times. It was as if the issues were decided and the votes were counted before the opening gavel.
One pastor used his microphone to plead that the “pro” side not call the question, but the “pro” speaker that followed him said, “with respect to my fellow brother, I call the question.” The President would rule the call in order, and they’d vote.
I couldn’t watch any more.
It’s one thing to have a debate, let people exhaust their powers of persuasion, and lose. It’s another thing to use the rules to suppress debate, especially in these matters of governance that so alter the way LCMS does things.
It was not the act of a chairman and Synodical President who seeks reconciliation with those who disagree with him.
An apology is in order, for those who stood in line and for Ted Kober.
Similar Posts:
***
GJ - NR is exactly right. Conventions have become ways to control the agenda rather than debate the issues. Kieschnick's heavy-handedness won the battles but lost the war.
According to
Roberts Rules, the chairman's job is limited to carrying out the will of the assembly. That ideal is seldom followed in church bodies and necessarily ends in the alienated leaving.
