# LCMS Convention Proceedings_St. Louis Missouri_2023_S207
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

9. STRUCTURE AND ADMINISTRATION
Wayne, Ind. and St. Louis, Mo. assured the convention that
they would have no problem serving as hosts, so no changes
were adopted (1864 Proceedings, 3). However, by 1869 this
assurance proved to be unrealistic, and C.F.W. Walther
suggested establishing delegate conventions. Professor
George Schick was given the responsibility to develop a plan.
This tentative plan was for two or more congregations to
select one pastor and one lay delegate. When the plan was
adopted in 1872 it was specified that the pastor and lay
delegate should be selected from between two to seven
congregations (1872 Proceedings, 96–97). Presumably, small
congregations would form large groupings and large
congregations would form small groupings. While the
convention was originally scheduled for 1875, the first
delegate convention was convened a year earlier in 1874.
The suggestion for a delegate convention, proposed in 1869,
was actually the second grouping of congregations within the
Synod. Prior to this formation of electoral circuits, visitation
circuits had been established by the Synod at its 1866
convention. While the two existed side by side, they were
created for completely different purposes. Electoral circuits
functioned only for the purpose of selecting delegates to
conventions of the Synod. However, the concept behind the
establishment of visitation circuits was to address a concern
considered crucial from the very beginning of the Synod,
which was to ensure and retain the unity of doctrine and
commitment to the Scriptures and Lutheran Confessions
within the Synod.
At the founding of the Synod in 1847, the responsibility for
visitation to ensure unity and faithfulness to the Scriptures
and Lutheran Confessions was assigned to the President of the
Synod. When the Synod divided into districts in 1854, one of
the major concerns was maintaining this unity within the
Synod, and it was resolved by giving the responsibility of
visitation not only to the president of each district of the
Synod but also to the President of the Synod as well. However,
with the rapid growth of the number of congregations in the
Synod, it became impossible for the President of the Synod to
carry out this duty of visitation. Therefore, the 1864
convention removed the duties of visitation from the general
President and essentially entrusted all duties of visitation of
the congregations and individual members of the Synod to the
district president. The one exception specified was that if the
President of the Synod was convinced that a district president
had erred in his dealing with a congregation or individual
member, the President of the Synod himself was authorized to
investigate personally (1864 Proceedings, 4; 1873 Handbook,
89).
Again, due to the growth of the Synod, these visitation
responsibilities quickly proved to be too great for a district
president alone to carry out. Therefore, the 1866 convention
adopted a resolution establishing visitation circuits of two to
seven congregations in order to help the district presidents
carry out their visitation responsibilities (1866 Proceedings,
85).
When the decision to have delegate conventions was adopted
at the 1872 convention, while the guidelines were also set at
two to seven congregations being given one pastor and one lay
Resolutions

delegate, which was the same numbers as used for visitation
circuits, there does not seem to have been any effort to have
these two types of circuits coincide, or even an indication that
they should. In both cases, districts were free to group them as
they pleased.
In the ensuing years a significant variation in the size of
electoral circuits developed among the various districts, with
many districts having electoral circuits of two or three
congregations. In an effort to reduce the number of delegates
at Synod conventions, the 1893 Synod convention adopted a
resolution calling for circuits to number between five to seven
congregations (1893 Proceedings, 125). However, there was no
change in Article III “Membership” as the 1899 edition of the
Synodical Handbook does not reflect this continuing to read:
“The power of this corporation shall be lodged with the
accredited clerical and lay delegates of the congregations in
actual membership with this synod. Not less than two and not
more than seven congregations being entitled to one clerical
and one lay representative in this organization at the option of
said congregations, and only such delegates shall be entitled
to a vote at the meetings of this Synod” (1899 Handbook, 54).
Synod President Dr. Ludwig Fuerbringer reported to the 1908
convention of the Synod that 77 of the 245 electoral circuits
did not conform to this rule adopted by the 1899 convention,
and he recommended enlarging electoral circuits to at least
ten congregations. However, no action was taken until the
1917 convention, which would then become effective with the
1920 convention. This convention also adopted a resolution
indicating that visitation and electoral circuits should
coincide as much as possible (1917 Proceedings, 108–9). The
following resolution is noteworthy as it explains the
reasoning for the change.
Reducing Number of Delegates
On the past scale of representation in the
Delegate Convention, Synod has become too
large a body, both for effective dispatch of
business and even more so with respect to the
quartering of delegates. After considering
various propositions, Synod
Resolved, 1. That henceforth from five to ten
congregations shall combine to form an
electoral circuit, with the understanding that
the relative size of congregations shall
determine how many shall constitute a circuit,
provided, however, that no circuit comprise less
than five nor more than ten congregations; each
circuit, as heretofore, to be represented by a
clerical and a lay delegate.
… (1917 Proceedings, English, 52)
These parameters remained in effect until the 1944
convention when a change was made, again prompted by the
perception that the conventions were becoming too large.
Note the reasons specified in the resolution adopted:
ACTION
The following resolutions
Committee 6 were adopted:

submitted

by

PROCEEDINGS OF THE 2023 (68TH) LCMS CONVENTION | 207