So Who Do You Believe? The President of Synod, or the President of the District?

Of the many, many unfortunate consequences of the effort by the Officers and Directors of the Minnesota South District to sell the campus ministries in Mankato and Minneapolis perhaps the most sad are the contradictory claims made by the the President of the Synod and the President of the District.  The President of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod has, reluctantly, been forced to expose this divide in his letter of June 12, 2012, to the Directors of Minnesota South.  We have posted a copy of it here:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2ywU0fUxfdQX2N6N2hrTEJUdEE

The letter is a short one, and the text is reproduced below:

Dear Directors,

 As you well know, I have refrained from involvement in the ULC matter. I am compelled, however, to send this note to you as my name has been used, in part, to justify the action of the board in selling ULC. I want to be very clear to you and for the sake of the good people in the Synod who have been so troubled by this whole affair.

In your presence I acknowledged the board’s legal “right” to sell the chapel. However, I do not in any way, shape, or form, condone the sale of ULC. It is a tragic mistake, which has unleashed a blizzard of sin on all sides. Our life together has been deeply embittered.

I continue to name you in my daily prayers, as I have from the beginning of this affair, praying the Lord would grant us all repentance and rescue us from our sinful selves.

Fraternally in Christ,

Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, President The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

So how was President Harrison's name "used, in part, to justify the action of the board in selling ULC"?  This is exactly what President Lane Seitz did on May 7, in his affidavit to the Fourth District Court of Minnesota, on page 14, Number 60:

https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B2ywU0fUxfdQN05XSjhXYXlFazg

In an Open Letter to the members of the Synod (including ULC) dated September 11, 2011, the Synod's President stated, in regard to the sale of the District's Property: "There is no question that the Board had the right to do what it did with the property." Attached hereto as Exhibit CC is a true and correct copy of the Synod President's September 20, 2011, letter.

So who do you believe, the president of the synod, or the president of the district?  Several previous posts on this blog have proven from the documents themselves that the President of the Minnesota South District has an unfortunate habit of swearing affidavits that contain items that are demonstrably false.  So we suggest you believe the President of Synod.  But check out the documents above for yourself, and let us know if you would like us to post more.

We feel very badly for President Harrison, and this is a shame.  The president of the Minnesota South District hid vital information from him, and used him to generate a public statement that he could use to support what the directors had done, which contradicted what President Harrison actually communicated.  We're guessing that the district president has still not told the synodical president that the board's legal right to sell the chapel is also fictitious, and based on amendments to Articles of Incorporation the district president filed by himself, which makes them void and invalid. 

We also wonder when the Board of Directors will realize that they too are being used and vital information is being hidden from them.