# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2010_S272
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

272

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

Question:

I would appreciate your opinion on other convention
resolutions and whether they are to be considered in
the same category, i.e., equally binding; in addition, I
request that your opinion include similar disciplinary
action as given in 08-2524, as well as directions for
district presidents (and circuit counselors) in monitoring and supervising parish pastors and other rostered
ministers and minimum standards for doing so, with
attending disciplinary action for district presidents who
do not follow such direction.
Opinion: Opinion 08-2524 is not only applicable to the matter of
2004 convention resolution 3-05A but to all resolutions, as already
stated in the bylaw quotations included in the opinion:
Under the assumption that 2004 Res. 3-05A is in accordance with
the Word of God, the Synod expects every member congregation of the
Synod to respect the resolution and consider it of binding force (Cf.
Bylaw 1.7.2). Bylaw 1.6.2 states, “Such resolutions come into being in
the same manner as any other resolutions of a convention of the Synod
and are to be honored and upheld until such time as the Synod amends
or repeals them” (emphasis added; cf. also Bylaw 1.8.1). Bylaw 1.7.1
further states, “The Constitution, Bylaws, and all other rules and regulations of the Synod apply to all congregational and individual members
of the Synod.”

Opinion 08-2524 also referenced 1971 Res. 2-21 which confirmed
the binding nature of such resolutions. In addition to the pertinent
quotes from the 1971 resolution in the above opinion, the convention
resolution also stated, “Meanwhile every member of the Synod is held
to abide by, act, and teach in accordance with the Synod’s resolutions.
… The Synod has repeatedly declared that all members should ‘honor
and uphold’ its resolutions (cf.: 1962, 3-17; 1965, 2-08; 1967, 2-04;
1969, 2-27). … To ‘honor and uphold’ means not merely to examine
and study them, but to support, act, and teach in accordance with them
until they have been shown to be contrary to God’s Word” (1971
Convention Proceedings, p. 119).
Ecclesiastical supervision by the President of the Synod or by the
district presidents, including any needed disciplinary measures, as
indicated in the CCM opinion (08-2524), is not limited to 2004 Res.
3-05A: “Resolution 3-05A, together with all of the resolutions of the
Synod, has implications for ecclesiastical supervision” (emphasis
added). The provisions for such ecclesiastical supervision (Bylaw
1.2.1 [g]) are set forth in Articles XI, XII, and XIII of the Constitution as well as in the Bylaws of the Synod, including but not limited
to Bylaw section 2.1; Bylaws 2.14.1 and 3.3.1–3.3.1.3, and Bylaw
section 4.4 (Synod Handbook, pp. 50, 62–62, 101–104, and 189–191).
Any district president who fails to carry out his responsibility of
ecclesiastical supervision is subject to the measures of Constitution
Art. XI B and Bylaw sections 1.10 and 2.15 (Handbook, pp. 15–16,
37ff., and 71ff.).
Adopted April 29–30, 2009
Voting Rights of Congregations (09-2545)
In a January 18, 2009 e-mailed letter, a parish pastor requested
an opinion with respect to the representation of a four-congregation
partnership (a multiple parish) at a district convention.
Question: Four congregations have formed a partnership. They
each have called the two pastors who serve this partnership. Can each of the four congregations send a lay
delegate to our district convention which is in June?
Also, what is the status of the two pastors in regards to
being the pastoral delegate or delegates to the district
convention?

Opinion: The four-congregation partnership is entitled to two votes,
that of a pastor who serves the four-congregation partnership and
a lay delegate, both chosen by the four-congregation partnership.
Article V of the Synod’s Constitution states: “At the meetings of
the districts of the Synod every congregation or parish is entitled to
two votes, one of which is to be cast by the pastor and the other by
the lay delegate.”
In its Opinion 03-2327 (January 20–21, 2003) the Commission on
Constitutional Matters opined with respect to Article V the opinion,
“Voting Rights of Congregations,” included the definition of the term
“parish” and addressed a multiple-congregation arrangement:
In the May 3–4, 1985 ruling (Ag. 1748), the commission ratified an
opinion that had been offered by the Secretary of the Synod regarding
the voting rights of congregations at district conventions when several
congregations form a dual or multiple parish, namely, “that a multiple
parish has only two votes, that of the pastor who serves the parish and a
lay delegate chosen by the parish.”
This opinion took into consideration earlier versions of the Handbook that had provided a definition of the term “parish,” e.g., “If a pastor
serves two or more congregations, these shall be regarded as one parish and shall be entitled to only one lay vote” (1963 Handbook, Bylaw
3.09). The term [parish] therefore refers to a dual or multiple congregation arrangement served by the same pastor and is not synonymous with
“congregation.” As such, two or more congregations served by one pastor share the right of representation by one lay delegate and one pastoral
delegate to a district convention.”
The four-congregation partnership constitutes one “parish” as defined above.

Other opinions of the commission are also helpful to understand
the representation provision of the Synod. In an October 1–2, 1970
opinion (item 226 in the minutes), the commission stated that the
matter of “two or more congregations served by one pastor shall be
regarded as one parish entitled to only one set of delegates” is not
contrary to the Constitution (see also Opinions Ag. 1275A, B [June
9, 1978]; Ag. 1734 [Feb. 1, 1985]; Ag. 1809 [March 27, 1987]; Ag.
2104 [May 22, 1998). And in a review of a district’s proposed bylaw
changes (02-2321 [Jan. 20–21, 2003], the commission noted that a
proposed change does not appear to clarify voting status as intended.
In the case of a dual parish served by two called pastors, the proposed bylaw would seem to allow each congregation to have both
a lay delegate and a pastoral delegate. Please note Article V of the
Synod’s Constitution: “At the meetings of the districts of the Synod
every congregation or parish is entitled to two votes, one of which is
to be cast by the pastor and the other by the lay delegate.” (See also
Opinion 03-2327.)
Adopted Feb. 7–8, 2009
Eligibility to Receive a Call While on Non-Candidate Status
(09-2546)
In a letter received January 26, 2009, a district president asked
follow-up questions to the commission’s Opinion 08-2537 which
clarified that candidate status cannot be extended beyond four years
(Bylaw 2.11.2.2 [a]).
Question 1: Is it the opinion of the CCM that placement on noncandidate status in all cases means that the worker is
not eligible to receive a call?
Opinion: No. A church worker on non-candidate status is eligible
to receive a call. A church worker on non-candidate status is “eligible to perform the duties of any of the offices of ministry specified in Bylaw section 2.11” (Bylaw 2.11.2.3). In every case, the
rostered church worker on non-candidate status remains a member
of the Synod and, like all rostered church workers, is eligible to

2010 Convention Workbook

2010 Convention.indb 272

4/15/10 2:40 PM