# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_2007_S310
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

310 OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS

place restrictions on who may be placed on the ballot for
the district convention that are not contained in the syn-
odical or district constitutions and bylaws?

Opinion: Bylaw 4.2.1 (a) states: “The conventions of the districts
shall be governed by the bylaws adopted by the Synod for its con-
ventions, insofar as these may be applicable.” Bylaw 4.2.1 (b) also
states: “Each district may adopt other regulations, provided these
are not contrary to the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.” Fur-
ther, Bylaw 4.7.1 states: “Each district may adopt regulations for
the nomination and election of its president, the nomination, elec-
tion, and ranking of its vice-presidents, and the succession in case
of vacancies, as long as these provisions do not conflict with the
Bylaws of the Synod.” Therefore, districts enjoy some freedom in
conducting nominations and elections processes, so long as addi-
tional provisions do not conflict with the Bylaws of the Synod.

The responsibilities of a district board of directors are provided
by the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod (Constitution, Art.
XII; Bylaws section 4.4; et al.) and the constitution and bylaws of
the district. The Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod have no pro-
vision for the direct involvement of a board of directors, district or
Synod, in a convention nominations process. The Synod’s Bylaws
provide for nominating committees on the Synod and district levels
(Bylaws 3.12.3ff. and 4.7.2), which have the responsibility for so-
liciting descriptions of criteria for qualified candidates (par. (b) of
Bylaw 3.12.4), names (par. (c) of Bylaw 3.12.3.4), qualifications
of each candidate (par. (e) of Bylaw 3.12.3.4), and pertinent infor-
mation concerning each candidate (par. (c) of Bylaw 3.12.3.6) for
the consideration of the committees. There is no restriction on what
information a nominations committee may request. From the list
of candidates, the nominations committee nominates persons that it
considers appropriate on the basis of the information received.

Therefore, in answer to the question as asked, a district board of
directors, like the Board of Directors of the Synod, does not have au-
thority to place restrictions on the ballot for a district convention.

Adopted June 30, 2005

Limits for Participation in Dispute
Resolution Process (05-2427)

In a May 26, 2005 letter a district president submitted questions
regarding access to the Synod’s dispute resolution process by
laypersons as provided by the five categories of allowable parties
defined in Bylaw 1.10.2. He indicated in his letter that his ques-
tions have specific reference to a layperson elected to his district’s
nominating committee by his district’s convention according to
Synod Bylaw 4.7.2.

Question 1: May an individual not defined in (1) through (5) [of
Bylaw 1.10.2] invoke the dispute resolution process as
a “complainant” as long as the “respondent” is an indi-
vidual defined in (1) through (5)?

Opinion: The answer to this question is “no.” Bylaw 1.10.2 defines
the parties to which it applies as “(1) members of the Synod, (2)
the Synod itself, (3) a district or an organization owned and con-
trolled by the Synod, (4) persons involved in excommunication, or
(5) lay members of congregations of the Synod holding positions
with the Synod itself or with districts or other organizations owned
and controlled by the Synod.” The current bylaw derives from the
prior dispute resolution process, previously found in Chapter VIII
of the 2001 Handbook and Bylaw 1.10.2 specifically from former
Bylaw 8.01. Only when both participants in a dispute are members
of one of the identified classes does the bylaw apply.

Question 2: Does the language of Bylaw 1.10.2 require that both
parties to a dispute be individuals defined in (1)
through (5)?

Opinion: The answer to this question is “yes” for the reasons set

forth above.

Question 3: Are laypersons that have been elected by a district con-
vention to serve on the nominating committee required
by Bylaw 4.7.2 “holding positions with the Synod it-
self or with districts” under the terms of Synod Bylaw
1.10.2 (5)?

2007 Convention Workbook

Opinion: The answer to this question is “yes.” To the extent that
the issue in dispute relates to the layperson’s role as an elected rep-
resentative of the district, the person is within the list of parties
identified in the fifth category, “(5) lay members of congregations
of the Synod holding positions with the Synod itself or with dis-
tricts or other organizations owned and controlled by the Synod.”

Adopted June 30, 2005

Call of Non-Rostered Commissioned
Ministers (05-2428)

In a June 20, 2005 letter, a district president asked questions re-
garding the extending of calls to non-rostered teachers, questions
raised by a particular situation in a congregation of his district. He
explained that the teachers in question have been trained and certi-
fied by the Synod but have chosen not to be rostered. He added that
the involved congregation understands that these teachers would
have no protection under the Constitution of the Synod and are em-
ployees for whom the congregation must assume its share of the
cost of Social Security and Medicare.

Question 1: May a member congregation of the Synod under its
right of self-government (Constitution VII 1 and
Bylaw 1.10.9) extend a call to a teacher in its school
who is not on the roster of the Synod?

Opinion: The term “call” has a variety of usages in the Synod. Even
volunteer workers (e.g., Sunday school teachers) and paid staff
(e.g., Organists) are at times referred to by congregations as
“called.” In its 1981 convention Res. 6-14 the Synod defined its
own usage of the term “call,” referring to it as a “solemn call” and
adopting the following definition for its use in its placement proce-
dures for teacher candidates:

A solemn call is an official request, offer, or agreement extended
by a calling body in the name of the triune God to a person eligible to
receive such a call into an educational ministry of the LCMS. Offers
extended to such eligible persons but erroneously referred to as “ap-
pointments” or “contracts” are also to be considered calls. A call may be
for a limited period of time (nontenured) or unlimited (tenured). A
solemn call is also referred to as a divine call. Official synodical call
documents are available from most district offices and Concordia Pub-
lishing House. Do not use locally designed documents. Calls may be
changed or terminated for valid reasons.

Eligibility to receive a solemn call requires the completion of grad-
uation or colloquy requirements at a synodical teachers college and ap-
proval for ministry by its faculty. Men and women educators who are
eligible to receive calls should not be otherwise engaged.
Congregations enjoy the right of self-government, which in-

cludes the right to call church workers of their own choosing. How-
ever, by their voluntary membership in the Synod, congregations
agree to limit their right of self-government and to order their rights
and responsibilities (including their right to call) according to the
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod.

Bylaw 2.5.3 of the 2004 Handbook provides the following lim-
itation on a congregation’s right to call: “Congregations that are
members of the Synod shall call only commissioned ministers who
have been admitted to their ministries in accordance with the rules
and regulations set forth in these Bylaws and have thereby become
members of the Synod.” Therefore it is a teacher’s membership in
the Synod (and not only training and certification by the Synod)
that is specifically required for the receipt of a call from a congre-
gation. While it might be contended that a call to a properly trained
and certified but non-rostered worker is merely using the word
“call” in a manner other than the solemn call defined above by
1981 Res. 6-14, Bylaw 2.5.3 makes clear that congregations that
contract for services with a non-rostered worker cannot refer to
such a contract as a call. Similarly, when a properly trained and
certified church worker chooses not to be rostered, the worker also
has chosen not to be available to receive a call.

The Synod places a premium upon the staffing of the class-
rooms of its member congregations’ schools with Synod-trained
and Synod-certified teachers (cf. 2004 Res. 2-07; 5-03A). The
Synod also places a premium upon the call and membership of
those teachers in the Synod (Bylaw 2.5.3), such membership pro-