# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S263
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS
consistent with the Bylaws. The Commission responded
as follows:
Opinion: The proposal to require a 10 minute presentation by candidates for President would change the process directed by the
Bylaws for election, as described in CCM Opinion 04-2396. The
request for information requiring disclosure as to whether a potential nominee was a plaintiff in the lawsuit is a request for information regarding qualifications and does not change the process of
elections. Bylaw 3.12.3.6 (c) requires the Committee for Convention Nominations to provide information such as age, occupation,
etc. Nothing precludes the convention from requesting or requiring
additional information to be supplied as a condition of their consideration of floor nominations.
Adopted July 13–19, 2007
Amendments to the Bylaws of the Synod (07-2505)
The following questions were submitted by the President of the
Synod during the course of the 2007 convention of the Synod.
Question 1: To which sorts, kinds, or types of amendments to the
Bylaws of the Synod do the provisions of Bylaw 7.1.1
apply?
Opinion: Bylaw 7.1.1 applies to all amendments to the Bylaws. The
Synod has long recognized the importance of careful consideration
of changes to its governing documents. At least as early as 1966,
the Bylaws required that amendments be “submitted to the Commission on Constitutional Matters for clearance prior to presentation to the convention.”
During the 1983 convention, the issue arose regarding proposed
bylaws establishing a Board of Theological Education and a separate Commission on Church Literature. The opinion included the
following:
In the case of the proposal for a Board of Theological Education,
the Commission ruled that these proposed bylaws had not been submitted to the Commission on Constitutional Matters for clearance
prior to presentation to the convention (Bylaw 14.01 d) and could not
therefore properly be brought before the convention.
In the case of the proposed Commission on Church Literature, the
Commission ruled that since the proposal and the proposed bylaws
had not been submitted to the President of the Synod no less than
sixteen weeks prior to the opening date of the convention, it could
not properly come before the convention unless it were adjudged a
matter of overriding importance and urgency and had been accepted
for convention consideration by the committee consisting of the President, First Vice-President, and Secretary of the Synod (Bylaw 2.19 2
b). Furthermore, the Commission ruled that it could not be properly
considered because it had not been submitted to the Commission
on Constitutional Matters for clearance prior to presentation to the
convention (Bylaw 14.01 d).
In 1997, the bylaw now numbered 7.1.1 (d) was considered as the
basis for a proposed special standing rule which read:
The chair shall require written or oral certification that proposed
constitutional or bylaw amendments have been examined by the Commission on Constitutional Matters and found not to be in conflict with
the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.
The process required for amending the Bylaws is contained in
Bylaw 7.1.1 (a) which requires that said amendments be presented
in writing to the convention. Paragraph (b) requires that such bylaw
changes are specifically identified as bylaw amendments, and that
they be considered by a convention floor committee. Bylaw 3.1.7 (f)
then requires the floor committee to consider the proposed amendment and report its findings and recommendations to the conven-

263

tion. Next, Bylaw 7.1.1 (c) requires that such amendments must be
considered by the Commission on Constitutional Matters prior to
presentation to a convention.
Question 2: May a convention of the Synod consider a minor amendment to a proposed amendment to the bylaws (which
proposed amendment has been moved by the Synod in
compliance with Bylaw 7.1.1) without following the
provisions of Bylaw 7.1.1?
Opinion: All amendments to the Bylaws must follow the process of
Bylaw 7.1.1. No exception has been made in the bylaw for “minor”
amendments. However, if the “minor” amendment is considered
by the floor committee as fairly within the scope of that which the
floor committee considered prior to bringing the matter to the floor,
and is within the scope of what the Commission on Constitutional
Matters examined in advance and found not to be in conflict with
the Constitution and Bylaws, no separate referral need be made.
Adopted July 13–17, 2007
Res. 8-07S Requirement for Consultation
by the President of Synod
Chairman Marcis called attention to the purpose of the meeting,
to continue consideration of an earlier conference call discussion
with the President of the Synod (August 15, 2007) in response to
2007 convention Resolution 8-07S, which directed the President to
consult with, among others, the Commission on Constitutional Matters regarding the calling of a special convention.
After discussion, the commission agreed to provide the following
response to the President of the Synod:
• The Commission on Constitutional Matters (CCM) again affirms the
constitutionality of special conventions, verifies that the requirement
of Resolution 8-07S for consultation by the President with the commission has been met, and reaffirms its availability to respond to questions
that may arise regarding such special conventions.
• While the commission recognizes that the current structure and governance of the Synod has developed over the past 150 years in a
patchwork manner without the benefit of comprehensive study of the
whole picture of the Synod’s work, and while the commission further
recognizes the role that CCM opinions have sometimes played in that
process, it also recognizes that its responsibilities do not include advising regarding the “urgent necessity” (Constitution, Art. VIII B 2) of
holding a special session of the Synod.
• While the commission does not view its role as to advocate any particular changes, it does, based on the commission’s experiences in
fulfilling its assigned responsibilities, recognize the following potential benefits:
• Restructuring in order to be better organized to work more effectively in support of and on behalf of congregations, to assist them
in carrying out their ministries as they seek to serve our Lord Jesus
Christ, the members of His body, and the world which stands in
need of the Word and the impact of His redeeming love.
• Restructuring in order to simplify and clarify responsibility and
accountability.
• Restructuring in order to empower and enable those given responsibility (officers, agencies, etc) for the benefit of the mission.
• Restructuring for the best use of all the resources available to the
Synod.

The decision whether the current “circumstances” (Constitution,
Article VIII B 1) satisfy the urgent necessity requirement for calling
a special session of the Synod (Constitution, Article VIII B 2) rightly
belongs to the President and district presidents of the Synod.
Adopted Aug. 22, 2007

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 263

4/15/10 2:40 PM