I
have seen and have read carefully the legal opinions from L.
Martin Nussbaum concerning whether or not the
Missouri Non-Profit Corporation Act modifies the LCMS polity
or allocation of its authority; whether or not the U.S.
Constitution and the First Amendment limits the effects, if
any, that the Missouri Non-Profit Corporation Act can have
upon the LCMS polity or allocation of authority; and what is
the authority of the CCM vis-à-vis the BOD.
I have also
read the comments of Carl H. Esbeck and Michael K. Whitehead.
Frankly,
these legal opinions make eminent sense to me.
I am also
aware that legal opinions concerning these matters have been
received by the Board of Directors from The Bryan Cave Law
Firm and from Armstrong Teasdale LLP.
But I do not have access to these latter opinions.
All I have heard is what these opinions purport to say
and purport to require the Board of Directors and the LCMS to
do.
Here is my
dilemma. As a
convention delegate, I will be asked to vote on various issues
– issues concerning the LCMS Constitution, Bylaws, and
Articles of Incorporation; issues concerning the CCM, the BCS,
the BOD, etc. etc. Issues
which these legal opinions address.
But how can I vote intelligently if I have not seen all
the opinions?
I fail to
understand the use of “attorney-client” opinion in this
matter. Who is
the client? Is it
not The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod?
The members of Synod are its pastors and its
congregations. Yet
the pastors and congregations have been denied access to the
Bryan Cave and the Armstrong Teasdale opinions.
Why?
Does the BOD
have a plan to make these opinions available to the synod?
In Board
Briefs I – Special Legal Opinions it was stated:
Q:
Why have these
opinions not been made public?
A:
The Board
appreciates that there is much interest in these special
opinions. Because,
however, the opinions contain information that could prove
harmful to certain entities in the Synod, the Board continues
to guard the attorney-client privilege by controlling the
opinions' exposure. The
documents, along with explanatory presentations by the
principal lawyer who provided the Bryan Cave opinion, are
being shared with such groups as the Commission on Structure
on a need-to-know basis.
The Board, which greatly values the trust and support
of Synod members, will share the opinions fully with the
church when the appropriate time comes.
When will the
appropriate time come? I
have urged the Board of Directors to share the opinions fully
as soon as possible. The
longer this is delayed, the greater the suspicion that there
is something in the opinions that the BOD does not want the
pastors and congregations of the Synod to see.
This is obviously not a healthy situation.
Rev. Jim
Rogers is Pastor of Lord of Life Lutheran Church in
Chesterfield, Missouri
