Brandon Booth
MollieBCS Meeting
Many of you have asked for details from the BCS meeting last Thursday and Friday.
The minutes of the meeting will come out in a few months, I imagine, but for now I can tell you what the BCS didn’t do. They didn’t get answers to the tough questions we’ve been asking. They didn’t hold anyone accountable. Instead, they apparently accepted David Strand’s latest version of events at face value. I guess that’s not surprising in that the board is not controlled by, well, people of the confessional persuasion. But it’s still disappointing.
Anyway, the latest version of Strand’s story is that he was acting under pressure from the Board of Directors and LCMS Treasurer Tom Kuchta when he abruptly fired Rev. Todd Wilken and Jeff Schwarz and canceled Issues, Etc.
I can not emphasize enough how untrue I believe this version of events to be, at least as it relates to Tom Kuchta. When I was on the BCS, Kuchta — an all around straight shooter — told us he thought KFUO should be doing more programs such as Issues, Etc.
The BCS also accepted Strand’s contention that Kuchta was threatening Strand and telling him that both the AM and FM stations should be sold. It is true that Kuchta has long argued that the synod should consider selling the FM station (aka Classic 99). It’s worth about $25 million, probably, and Kuchta thinks the money could be better allocated elsewhere. Reasonable people can disagree on this idea. But — and this is important — when Kuchta told my BCS about his feelings circa 2007, he said he thought the sale of the FM station could finance the AM station and, more importantly, programs such as Issues, Etc. into perpetuity. His position on this is long held. The AM station — where Issues, Etc. was broadcast — isn’t even worth much, so I doubt he would be that interested in selling it.
Tom can speak for himself on this matter, but I find Strand’s supposed version of events to be highly suspect.
It also doesn’t answer the big questions. Why was Kieschnick notified, but not the BCS? No, really. Why? And why during Holy Week? Why the initial direct order to remove all evidence of Issues, Etc. and take down the archives? Why no notice? Why the rush? Why, why, why?
The other huge story from the meeting is that Todd Wilken and Jeff Schwarz told the BCS that they reject the hush money clause of the Synod’s proposed severance package are prepared to walk away from it — benefits and all — if the LCMS doesn’t rescind the gag order! The BCS decided against removing the gag order themselves — a move that would have done much to quell the storm — and instead put the whole issue into the hands of the law firm where, get this, David Strand’s wife serves as the chief counsel for the LCMS. So, the BCS decided to lawyer up. Interesting.
By the way, if you want to ask any questions of the BCS members — now or later — here are their email addresses: Dennis Clauss: dennisclauss@new.rr.com; David Kluth: david.kluth@concordia.edu; Ernest Garbe: epgarbe@mmtcnet.com; David Berger: bergerd@csl.edu; Kevin Vogts: kvogts@longlines.com; John Bush: pastor.bush@stpaul-trenton.org; Candace Mueller: candacepm1@msn.com
And please let us know if you find out any other pertinent information about the board meeting.
Filed under: Updates
Thank you, Mollie for the update, disappointing though it is. Could you please give us the the board members’ first and last names? Some are apparent from their email addresses but some are not.
Susan M
Oh, how embarrassing… they’re right there. I obviously didn’t read carefully enough! I wish we could delete comments!!!!
Susan,
No — I added them as soon as you made your comment!
I feel so much better!! :)
I can’t say it enough Mollie– You’re awesome. Thanks again.
Mrs. Strand was the lawyer at the 2007 LCMS Convention in Houston who told the delegates that the Synod could get away with violating the law because they were a church!
Wow…talk about a conflict of interest.
I wonder if Rev Vogts will say anything.
So, what will the BOD’s response be?
“These events transpired with our awareness but neither by our order nor at our direction.”
Strand walks, blames Kuchta and the BOD, and everyone has plausible deniability.
The District Presidents are supposed to have met sometime this weekend. Were they as gullible as the BCS?
What refreshing news to hear that Todd and Jeff stayed true by rejecting the gag order. (I think a lot of people have been waiting for this) They are indeed faithful and true bearers of the Word.
You hang in there too… and don’t be intimidated by anyone. God is your witness Your clarity of writing and accuracy of reporting is read by more eyes than you will will ever know. We do give thanks to God!
How many more bodies will be thrown under the bus?
As a non-Lutheran, I guess I technically don’t have a dog in this fight. However, I’d appreciate knowing about the financial needs of the Schwarz and Wilken families. (Unless you can get Bennie Hinn’s fundraising services!)
Hi Bob,
Just follow this link for details:
http://weedon.blogspot.com/2008/04/wilkenschwarz-fund.html
Both men are married and have children. The blog entry I’m sending you to is a couple weeks old, I think $30,000 has been raised so far to support these two families.
Josh,
I sent in a modest contribution the very first week. The link that you gave me to weedon doesn’t give an “up-to-date”.
(I can see if for strategic purposes they might not want to give out specific data, since Todd and Jeff seem to be hanging tough.)
Of the various web pages that have arisen since the Issues massacre, I wonder which one gives the most up-to-date details about the needs of the Wilkens and Schwarzs.
You might ask Weedon at his blog, since his church is one of the repositories for and distributors of the funds.
Sent in a second just this weekend–taken from what I would normally have spent on ‘convenience foods’ (not always ‘fast’).
I presume an up-to-date becomes out-of-date very quickly. I hope so!
not exactly what you are looking for in regards to fund-raising updates, but Rev. Charles Lehmann’s blog (he was a vicar a few years back at the church the Schwarz family attends) has been giving updates on both families, especially in regards to Beth’s health and trips to the Mayo Clinic:
http://chaz-lehmann.livejournal.com/
Thanks, Mollie, for the latest update report on the Violet Vatican’s™ Reichskristallnacht.
I’m just gonna say this.
In ALL sincerity (nothing in vane about this)
How in God’s name can they justify this?
Sure, they can TRY to justify it with their numbers (which are a joke).
But how in God’s name? Seriously.
What Godly Christian justification can they give for doing this?
They can throw every percentage, every dollar amount, all of the “dire financial situation” talk they want, but that gives NO remission for firing two of God’s called witnesses instantly with no warning.
Makes my blood just boil.
1 Timothy 1: 5-6
5. The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6. Some have wandered away from these and turned to meaningless talk.
Sounds familiar.
The fact that they would not accept the hush money is very telling of these men’s trust in God’s providence & in their desire to let the truth be known. This emphasizes how we, as the laity who appreciate the ministry of these men, need to continue our financial support of them, as much as we are individually able. I would hate to see the support taper down as time passes or as interest declines.
Ellen B,
You are right.
We need to step up to the plate.
This is the time.
Thanks be to God for all those who have.
It sound like it may be in good order to raise some legal funds to support the cause of these two gentlemen as well.
Has anyone written something like a Bill of Particulars regarding the LCMS denominational leadership. I am a Confessional Lutheran. I was a listener to Issues,Etc. I have been reading the blogs and seems the denomination is a bit like the Aegean stables.
There is no transparency, and there should be. If you are hiding something, it’s because you have something to hide.
Todd and Jeff were wrongfully fired; Todd was fired contrary to the theology of the call (Rasberry’s Raz) .
There seems to be questionable financial management, borrowing against funds in order to fund this ABLAZE program.
The denomination, again seems to me, is raising money under false pretenses. The want grandpa’s money but don’t want to spend that money in the way grandpa might wish, supporting traditional Lutheranism. Seems like a bait and switch.
Again, raising money under false pretenses, the denomination skims 40% from the donations to LCMS world relief for example (not even sure if I am write about this). I don’t know if I want to give money to LCMS World Relief if 40% is going to the denomination for something like ABLAZE or to build a bigger building.
Oh, the irony!
You, of course, realize that David Strand’s wife’s firm was hired by the previous Board of Directors. This is when Christian Preus, David Hawk, Liz Fleugel, and Ed Balfour, and Robert Kuhn were calling the shots. Now, those folks are “confessional.” So, it’s the “confessionals” fault that she’s there!
Second, I’m amazed at how you complain about the “gag order.” Paul McCain fired the entire staff of CPH and forced them to sign gag orders in order to get severance pay. The reasoning? CPH was losing money and these folks needed to go. Now, I think people would agree that McCain is confessional. So the precedent for firing people and then requiring gag orders begins with confessionals!
Oh, Mark, you really should read the by-laws of the Synod. They make it quite clear that staff serve at the pleasure of the Board and/or supervisors, regardless of call. Mollie would know–she was on the Board when they fired Tom Lapacka and David Mahsman, both of whom were called to their positions.
Seamus!
Wow. That’s some anger you’re spewing! It’s almost as if there *is* a division in Synod, isn’t there!
While I actually consider the LCMS to be a left-hand corporation and, therefore, have a different understanding of a “call” than congregations should, I do think that boards should at least approve any employment changes — particularly with ordained clergy. I’m still dying to find out why the BCS wasn’t even notified of the terminated call before it went down. And yet Kieschnick was. So interesting.
In any case, Seamus, your allegations are wrong as they relate to my service on the board. You might want to get your facts straight before you go off again.
But thanks for reading!
Actually, Seamus, help me out here.
What bylaw are you referring to when you say this?
“Oh, Mark, you really should read the by-laws of the Synod. They make it quite clear that staff serve at the pleasure of the Board and/or supervisors, regardless of call.”
I want to make sure we’re all on the same page. Also, I think it would help to get the proper information out.
Seamus,
You almost sound like the Wilken/Schwarz firings were payback for everything the “nasty confessionals” have done. It that how it works?
Are you saying that David Strand isn’t “confessional”? Shall I quote the Strand himself?
All 2.5 million of our members would call themselves confessional Lutherans, so I’m not sure where this idea of division comes from…
And who’s complaining about the gag order?
As far as I can tell, Wilken and Schwarz aren’t complaining about the gag order, they’re rejecting it.
Seamus, why are you so angry? Is it because one of your own finally got caught with his hand in the cookie jar?
I don’t think the issue should be about the confessional leanings of the people who hired Mrs. Strand, but instead is she carrying out this vocation to the glory of God? I don’t claim to know the answer to that, but it seems more constructive than pointing fingers at who hired her.
You say that I’m wrong about my allegations as to your service on the BCS.
You mean…
You were not on the Board when it fired David Mahsman?
You were not on the Board when it fired Tom Lapacka?
You were not on the Board when it appointed David Strand?
Those three actions took place in the last triennium when you served your only term on the BCS.
But if you wish to explain how you were on the Board at the time when these actions took place, but were really not on the Board when these actions took place, I’d be glad to see your explanation.
As to the by-law in question:
“3.11.1 Unless otherwise specified by the board of directors of the respective
agency, all employees shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing
authorities.”
Oh, I agree with you that the BCS should have been notified. The Board should have called Strand on the carpet just for that.
BTW, Mollie, I have no anger. I just find much of this ironic. E.g., you are the one who pointed out that the Synod’s lawyer is Strand’s wife. Is that news? The previous Board of Directors put her in that position and your Board put Strand in his. Y’all knew they were married at the time. So, why act so shocked now?
So why didn’t the Board call Strand on the carpet?
Can you enlighten us? Or no?
Seamus,
If you email me and tell me who you are, I’ll explain to you what you’ve got wrong. It deals with employment. I can assure you that you are wrong on a major point of fact. Thanks.
Mollie, how did you get your information on this meeting?
(Or is the situation too highly charged for you to comment on that?)
David,
Fair question and I’m not going to disclose my sources. However, I hear that we’ll have a draft of the minutes “soon” — whatever that means!
There will be tons more information for everybody to dig through. This would be an expedited provision of meeting minutes and I think it’s an excellent idea on the part of the BCS.
[...] BCS Meeting Many of you have asked for details from the BCS meeting last Thursday and Friday. The minutes of the meeting will come [...] [...]
“3.11.1 Unless otherwise specified by the board of directors of the respective
agency, all employees shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing
authorities.”
Sure Seamus, the law is on synod’s side. But is this really fair? Where is your compassion? How would you like it if you came to work one day and were told you were fired for no good reason? Be honest, you wouldn’t like it.
There is so much talk about bylaws in the synod, but it seems to me that the golden rule is forgotten. How are we supposed to be a beacon of God’s love, grace and hope to the world when things like this occur?
The unchurched look upon organized religion and denominations with deep suspicion and events like this give them a good reason for that.
It’s sad…
The points that Seamus is trying to distract us from are:
1) Strand’s ever-changing explanation for the cancelation and firings,
2) Strand’s failure to explain why he fire them without warning, without explanation, in such a hurry, etc.
3) Strand’s failure to explain why he told the President, but neither the Treasurer (as required by BYLAWS) nor his own board.
4) Strand’s failure to explain why he considered no other options, such as cutting a few highly-paid atheists from the bulging management and on-air staff of Classic 99 FM.
Starting with Michael Bolton, who said I was distracting folks from the main issue, Mollie is the one who pointed out (in bold print no less) that David Strand’s wife (Sherri) is the chief counsel for the LCMS. I just pointed out that this was true when the Board she served on appointed him to his position (at the suggestion of Kevin Vogts, according to his post on LutherQuest). He was already working in a staff position for the BCS when the Board of Directors fired Leonard Pranschke’s firm and hired her firm with her as chief counsel in February, 2005. She knew all of this. She knew it when she and her Board appointed David Strand to his current position. So why put it in bold and act as if this is news? Heck, I knew that and I’ve never served on any board or commission in the Synod, let alone of the two that was involved with the appointments at the time!
As an aside, someone asked why the Board didn’t call Strand on the carpet. I have no idea. Ask Mollie, she’s the person with the sources, not me. I think he should have been fired for making such a move without informing the Board first. I told a Board member that his action made the Board look stupid. But don’t blame me; I didn’t hire him. Mollie did.
Since you brought up by-laws, Mike, which by-law would require him to inform the Treasurer of the Synod of their termination? This would be covered under Staff (section 3.11) and I can’t find any rule requiring the Treasurer of the Synod to be informed or otherwise involved.
Also, Mike, you talked about the confessionals and said that I consider all of this payback. Not true. Mollie was the one who said that “the board is not controlled by, well, people of the confessional persuasion.” I just pointed out that some of the things she’s complaining about are were put in place by people that I assume she would think are of “the confessional persuasion.” It’s called irony. (The BoD vote hiring Sherri Strand’s firm in 8-7; Ed Balfour, Christian Preus, David Hawk, and Liz Fluegel all voting in the majority.) They did this knowing that her husband had a staff position in the LCMS.
Oh yeah, you said something about one of “my own” being “caught with his hand in the cookie jar.” I don’t know anything about Strand; never met the man. But then, I didn’t appoint him to his position. Mollie did. She was on the Board then. Maybe he’s one of her own.
You see, I can’t figure out why no one is calling *her* on the carpet for being on the Board that appointed Strand to his job. Did she vote not to appoint him or what? Or are some facts too uncomfortable to face?
Now, New to da LCMS, I never said that this was the right thing to do. I’m just pointing out that it has happened before, in the case of CPH, and therefore no one can act shocked that it’s happening now. But people seem to be acting as though this is sumthin’ brand new and never heard of in LCMS history. It was bad then and it’s bad now. I have as much compassion and concern for these two that I did for Jane Fryar and other folks that I knew at CPH then. Where was Mollie and her WSJ articles then? Nowhere to be seen. Looks to me like Mollie has a lot more compassion and concern for these two than she did for the CPH folks.
And no, Mollie, I’m not wrong. Although it could be argued that Lapacka’s tenure was up and your board simply did not renew his call (his “farewell” was in the LCMS IC newsletter on 1/13/2006). But Mahsman was fired by your board (3/ 11/ 2005) with no public reason ever given.
But let’s get this clear. Did you (Or your board) know that David Strand’s wife was the chief counsel of the LCMS when your Board appointed him to his current position?
If so, did you point out the possibility of a conflict of interest to the Board?
If you knew this when your Board made the appointment, why are you acting like it’s a big secret now?
Seamus,
Very interesting that you are hiding behind a pseudonym while attacking everyone in your midst. I wish people would just say who they are and take their lumps. It’s not fun for me to have people attacking me every which way, but it only seems right to stand up and be counted.
Anyway, I think I will make a separate post abut how David Strand was chosen for his current position.
If people are interested in hearing yet more about how Kieschnick and company control EVERYTHING that goes down in the IC, I will share my thoughts about why David Strand was chosen.
I’ve been dying to share more about my experience serving on the Board for Communication Services. I consider it the most frustrating experience of my life.
More distraction.
The points Seamus ignores yet again:
1) Strand’s ever-changing explanation for the cancelation and firings,
2) Strand’s failure to explain why he fire them without warning, without explanation, in such a hurry, etc.
3) Strand’s failure to explain why he told the President, but neither the Treasurer (as required by BYLAWS) nor his own board.
4) Strand’s failure to explain why he considered no other options, such as cutting a few highly-paid atheists from the bulging management and on-air staff of Classic 99 FM.
And by the way Seamus, it’s Michael, not Mike.
But for you, Mr. Bolton will do.
Ah yes, Kieschnick’s numerous vetos of candidates, and refusal to accept any nominee for the BCS Ex. Dir. position EXCEPT David Strand?
I remember it well. Those were the salad days.
Seamus, when you address my point, I agree with you completely. What I say about compassion for these two men apply to all who have been treated unfairly in church.
I am sickened and hurt by how common these actions are between pastors and congregations, DPs and pastors, synod staff, etc. I wanted a life in the church because I believed Lutherans had honor and dignity and wanted to live a God pleasing life. What I do see too much of is this kind of brutal thuggery that hurts people and their families.
Following the posts on this blog about David Strand is interesting. He’s now saying that it isn’t him but the treasurer Kuchta ? There is a lot of passing the buck which reminds me of Genesis 3.
And my more general point is that there is much talk in church about power and authority and which bylaws govern actions, but I see so precious little grace and compassion. The church is a scary place. In fact I’ve seen more compassion in the secular world than in church and that truly breaks my heart.
good collection of news stories related to canx of Issues is on the http://www.lutheran-resources.org site under their news section
Not much to add, except that Mollie is my hero(ine) and as much as it surprises me to hear me say it, I’ll be sending a donation to the Schwarz/Wilken fund.
Surprises me because I used to listen to IE mainly to get my Irish up. I’m a religious liberal and a feminist, and yelling at the radio when Todd expounded on his position was one of my favorite intellectual exercises.
IE also made me think deeply about my opinions and beliefs, prompted me to do research to defend my positions, and sometimes (sometimes) to change them.
The fact that the “leaders” of my former churchbody would so blatantly, brazenly and heartlessly quash free speech…
and then offer no good reason for same …
and NOW sic the lawyers on the case … makes me want to spit. Which for a good, sedate German girl is pretty darned bad, y’know?
Mollie, Brendon, anybody else: WLL THERE BE BUMPERSTICKERS?
Because I’d be happy to plaster the old hybrid with them as I drive around Kirkwood.and its vicinity.
Wow, Seamus, nice distraction techniques.
Isn’t it ironic (since you like that word so much) that here we are, complaining about deceptive communications from Strand, etc. and you come in with your distractions.
Yes, Strand is of your stripe, whether you know him or not.
Or you could stick to the issues. Your call.
Seeamus,
If you are so knowledgable, you also know that the board was constantly overridden by Pres. K.
Mollie’s point was not that Mrs, Strand should not be a lawyer, but that she would not be neutral in this case.
Want to tell you of a gal that hasKFUO sticker on her bumper…thus she has taken a large magic marker (Sharpie) black and drawn a circle around it and put the black mark thru it. That to me is a another silent WHY.
Good Idea I thought ! ?
Heroes, villains. Seamus. Is this what it’s all about? Satan has not and will not cease his cunning. If this were about heroes, Pastor Wilken and Mr. Schwarz would be mine. I sat in front of my computer yesterday trying to fathom what it means for their families if they decline the severance package. They are examples in our day of what it truly means to deny self for the sake of Christ, to be in the world not of the world, etc. etc. But heroes they would not want to be. This battle is the Lord’s. We are all beggers, none of us fit for this battle save for the armor of God: the helmet of salvation and the sword of Scripture. Satan would love to see us start tearing each other up. Phones could stop ringing, the issue would no longer be the issue, and they could continue with their counting and their more appealing radio programming. (More appealing, we understand, means short on truth. The truth offends, after all, and that’s not real appealing to the masses.) I’m trying to encourage us to stay the course with our eyes straight ahead. It looks to be a long road. I for one don’t think President Kieschnick can be beat when it comes to politics. (And yes, I tie him in with this. I have never yet heard him defend Issues.) He is swift, clever–a mastermind politician. In reference to the issue at hand, I have no idea what God has in mind for defeating the enemy. But as for us, we need to continue to be encouraged to know that there are 7,000+ others, continue the fight through living out our vocations (as Mollie is doing as a journalist), and continually be armored with the helmet of salvation and the sword of Scripture. In the end, it’s not a political maneuver that will win this battle.
First off, I’m just a layman looking in from far outside the inner circle of events … and I admit a shallow depth of knowlege as to the workings of the internal LCMS machinery …
So what if you get an answer to ‘Why?’ It would, I agree, be nice to have an honest answer, but so what?
If the ‘Big K’ himself confessed to being the cause of all these events because he loathed what Jeff and Todd were doing, so what?
Other than getting really angry, what could be done?
From reading several blogs I get the distinct impression that many rules changes over the years (and several critical ‘appointments’ by K) have left the layman absolutely powerless to affect any action in response to the vulgar actions that caused the cancellation of the program. Again, so what?
What benefit do I gain by knowing ‘Why?’
The only thing this could confirm is what I already understand - that the ‘confessionals’ have either been too ‘tolerant’ or asleep at the switch and now the ‘other side’ is running amok.
So someone please tell this thick headed kraut what difference it would make to know ‘Why?’ What I’d prefer to know - and so far I have not seen anyone address this - what can a lowly layman like myself do?
I’ve called the IC. I’ve called K’s office. I’ve emailed all those listed above. And I’ve been ‘blown-off’ by all.
It seems to me that the administration of the LCMS has a ‘mind over matter’ management style.
They don’t mind because we don’t matter.
So what now can be done?
>>I for one don’t think President Kieschnick can be beat when it comes to politics.<>Other than getting really angry, what could be done? . . . what can a lowly layman like myself do? . . . So what now can be done?<<
The fact of the matter is, Kieschnick CAN be beat! In three elections, he has gotten 51%, 53%, and 52%.
So what can be done? Beat him. It is very doable. Care enough to get informed and get involved. There is a LOT that can be done: NOMINATIONS, OVERTURES, and DELEGATES. That’s how you get things done.
We are going to get to work and TEACH, CONFESS, and ORGANIZE.
CH:
Been there, done that … I was an elector for the last convention. I rose, spoke and was witness to one of the most ‘left’ anti lutheran delegates being elected in spite of more ‘moderate’ choices.
It was clear that the room was ’stacked’ and I was the lone ‘confessional’ voice. Sadly I now see that I was there only to give the others a vaneer of legitimacy for a pre determined outcome. I could be wrong, but my hindsight instincts are usually good …
They listened politely (though one actually snickered), ignored what I said and then did as they planned.
Reminds me of what’s going on now ….
So now what?
Mollie, without getting into who said what anonymously, is it true that until this happened, David Strand was regarded favorably by confessionals?
Speaking for myself, I can say that one of the reasons I supported David Strand is because I knew he would never do anything unless explicitly told to by those in authority over him.
I actually believe that still to be the case.
The main issue, however, is that every effort by my board to manage our department as we thought best was overruled by Synodical shenanigans, including, for instance, President Kieschnick issuing executive orders stopping us from hiring the best candidates for various positions. We knew that we could never hire the most qualified candidate for the position in such an environment. We knew that the candidate had to be approved by President Kieschnick. Of our options (those that Kieschnick would approve of), Strand was the only one who would not act alone in defiance of those in authority over him.
Since he didn’t even notify the BCS of his intention to fire Wilken/Schwarz and terminate Issues, Etc., I can only speculate as to which authority he was following in carrying out his actions.
Then we actually agree, Mr. Henrickson. I said he cannot be beat politically. If we merely fight him politically, his cleverness will beat us every time. But teaching and confessing, ahh…those are other matters indeed. Those are carrying the helmet of salvation and the sword of scripture. And with those, if God so wills, he can be beat. That being said, his being beat will not heal all our synodical ills and, while a worthwhile goal perhaps, certainly not the ultimate reason to teach and confess. But you know that. We may lose a thousand earthly battles, but we still teach and confess. I fear that is what Mr. Strand and some others have lost site of. For what? Are they tied to their retirement plan? I don’t know. All I do know is that when man attempts to shut out God’s Word, we fight against it, wearing His armor.
We can beat President Kieschnick in the next election. We just need to encourage confessional laypeople to volunteer to be delegates. Others in the circuits will probably not know where these laypeople stand on Church politics, etc. I have seen this happen twice. It all starts with electing confessional District Presidents next year.
On another web site, Rev. Vogts, a BCS member, posted on Monday, April 21, “The Board approved a statement that will be issued shortly, along with a list of Questions and Answers.”