Official Workbook PDF page source text

LCMS 2026 Convention Workbook: Reports and Overtures, PDF page 467

workers and provide opportunity for their continuing growth” 
(Const. Art. III 3); and 
WHEREAS, The Synod has the responsibility to oversee that 
training, and has done so in various forms throughout its history; 
and 
WHEREAS, The Synod has delegated a portion of that 
responsibility to the prior approval panels outlined in various 
bylaws (Bylaws 3.6.6.1; 3.10.5.7.3; 3.10.6.8.2; 3.10.6.9.2); and 
W
HEREAS, The restructuring of the Synod by the 2010 Synod 
convention eliminated existing agencies tasked with prior approval 
for seminary faculty members (namely, the Board for Pastoral 
Education; 2010 Res. 8 -08A, “To Realign the National Synod 
Ministries around Two Mission Boards”); and 
WHEREAS, The Synod in convention adopted 2013 Resolution 5-
11B, “To Amend Bylaw 3.10.4.7.3 re Appointment of Seminary 
Faculty” (the noted bylaw being subsequently renumbered to 
3.10.5.7.3), which established a three-person prior approval panel 
for the appointment of full -time seminary faculty members, to be 
comprised of three ordained members, including “the President of 
Synod (or his designee), the chairman of the Council of Presidents 
(or his designee), and the c hairman of the Board for National 
Mission (or his designee)” (Bylaw 3.10.5.7.3 [a]); and 
W
HEREAS, The Synod in convention subsequently adopted 2016 
Res. 7-06B, “To Assist Our CUS Institutions in Demonstrating Our 
Common Confession,” which established a three-person prior 
approval panel for the appointment of those teaching theology 
classes at a Concordia University System institution, to be 
comprised of three ordained members, including “the President of 
Synod (or his designee), the chairman of the Council of Presidents 
(or his designee), and a member of the Concordia University 
System (CUS) board selected by the chair” (Bylaw 3.10.6.9.2); and 
W
HEREAS, Those panels not only have responsibility to work on 
behalf of the Synod but are also responsible to the Synod; and 
WHEREAS, There has been confusion about the prior approval 
process by candidates under consideration, their ecclesiastical 
supervisors, boards of regents, and others throughout the Synod; 
therefore be it 
Resolved, That the Minnesota South District in convention give 
thanks to the Lord of the Church for using the Synod and its 
agencies to preserve and enlarge the workers of the harvest (Matt. 
9:35–38); and be it further 
Resolved, That the district in convention express thanks and 
appreciation to the CUS Board of Directors for developing and 
making public their criteria for evaluating theology faculty 
candidates during their prior approval process ( cus.edu/wp-
content/uploads/2025/03/Prior-Approval-Protocol-for-Theology-
Faculty.pdf); and be it further 
Resolved, That the district in convention memorialize the Synod 
to further clarify and communicate the prior approval process for 
seminary faculty and seminary and university presidents; and be it 
finally 
Resolved, That the district in convention memorialize the Synod 
in convention to encourage fraternal and confidential 
communications through appropriate channels with candidates not 
approved by a prior approval panel, along with their ecclesiastical 
supervisor, taking into account privacy laws, to enable them to 
provide correction where necessary and encouragement to continue 
their service and ministry to the Church with confidence and joy. 
Minnesota South District 
Ov. 7-21 
To Support and Clarify Prior Approval Process 
Preamble 
Since the 2013 Synod c onvention, appointments to theological 
faculties at all universities and seminaries, as well as all college, 
university, and seminary presidential appointments, have been 
subject to the prior approval process. While the 2013 Synod 
convention amended the B ylaws to delegate the responsibility for 
prior approval to specific groups (as referenced below) the Bylaws 
did not, and still do not, stipulate how the process of prior approval 
should be carried out. Over time this has led to questio
ns as to the 
standards used to evaluate candidates as well as the process used by 
the prior approval panels. In the hopes of building trust and 
relieving any undue criticism of the panels and the process, the 
following overture aims to increase transparency for the process and 
standards used by the panels as well as ensuring clear 
communication between the panels, the candidates, and the Synod. 
WHEREAS, One of the expressed  purposes of the Synod is to 
“recruit and train pastors, teachers, and other professional church 
workers and provide opportunity for their continuing growth” 
(Const. Art. III 3); and 
WHEREAS, The Synod has the responsibility to oversee that 
training; and 
WHEREAS, The Synod has designated that responsibility to the 
prior approval panels outlined in various bylaws ( Bylaws 3.6.6.1; 
3.10.5.7.3; 3.10.6.8.2; 3.10.6.9.2); and 
WHEREAS, Those panels not only have responsibility to work on 
behalf of the Synod but are also responsible to the Synod; and 
WHEREAS, Those under consideration for theological 
professorships and other positions requiring prior approval  have 
ordinarily been ordained into the Office of the Holy Ministry or 
have been commissioned and/or consecrated into an auxiliary office 
of the Church; and 
W
HEREAS, Those under consideration for aforementioned 
positions have also been examined and approved for service on the 
roster of the Synod; and 
W
HEREAS, Those individual members of the Synod have, by 
virtue of their membership in the Synod, agreed to the confessional 
basis as outlined in Constitution Article II, as well as recognized 
and affirmed the validity of Bylaw sections 1.6–1.8; and 
WHEREAS, There are members in good standing who at times do 
not pass prior approval and receive no follow -up or counsel , yet 
remain in good standing; therefore, be it 
Resolved, That the Synod in convention give thanks to the Lord 
of the Church for using the Synod and its agencies to preserve and 
enlarge the workers of the harvest; and be it further 
Resolved, That the Synod in convention give thanks to those 
engaged in the various prior approval processes for being engaged 
in difficult and important work; and be it further 
Resolved, That the Synod in convention require that all criteria 
used by the various panels to carry out the responsibility entrusted 
to them by the Synod be made transparent and publicly available on 
demand; and be it finally 
2026 Convention Workbook
432 UNIVERSITY EDUCA TION