# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_April 15 17 2002_S8
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Opinion: According to Bylaw 2.03, decisions regarding such matters are the responsibility of District
standing constitution committees, for which decisions such committees may wish to obtain guidance from
the Commission on Theology and Church Relations.
Question 3: “We also notice in the Membership area the statement on communicant membership is quite
open. Churches I have been to in the past have defined this area to include regular use of
Word and Sacrament….Does this kind of concept exceed the position of the church or are we
able, through this document, to stand very specifically for a position which we feel gives
direction to our people?”
Opinion: The Commission reiterates that decisions of this nature are the responsibility of District standing
constitution committees. It is the stated responsibility of these committees not to needlessly restrict
congregations but to “examine the constitution and bylaws to ascertain that they are in harmony with
Holy Scripture, the Confessions, and the teachings and practices of the Synod” (Bylaw 2.03 a).
Question 4: “How the guidelines are to be used is not seen uniformly across our Synod. Is this document,
as would be implied from the title, “guidelines” in which we find our unity or are they to be
understood in a more rigid fashion where divergence from their position would leave a
church outside our fellowship?”
Opinion: As already stated, the Commission intends that its document serve to provide guidelines to the
congregations of the Synod, recognizing the desirability of uniformity as well as the wide divergences
that exist among congregations. While the guidelines may also serve to promote unity in the Synod, such
unity is grounded in “common confession and mission” (Bylaw 1.01) according to the requirements of
membership established by the congregations (Article VI; Bylaw 1.05 d).
21. Questions re Duties of the President and Board of Directors, Dispute Process (02-2257)
In a letter dated February 13, 2002, a pastor of the Synod, emphasizing their urgency, “put seven
questions to the Commission on Constitutional Matters in view of recent and important developments.”
Question 1: “Constitution XI B sets forth the duties of the President of Synod. Is it legitimate to use a
Bylaw (e.g. 2.27 g) to abridge Constitution XI B?”
Opinion: It is never appropriate for a bylaw to abridge any part of the Constitution. The Commission
opines that the bylaw in question does not impinge upon Article XI of the Constitution.
Question 2: “Constitution Article XI C 1 states that the Vice-Presidents shall function upon request of the
President. Do the Vice-Presidents of Synod have the authority to assume his function without
the request of the President?”
Opinion: Article XI C 2 and Bylaw 3.105 provide such provision in the case of disability, deposition from
office, or death. Other than under such circumstances, the Vice-Presidents have no authority to assume
any function of the President unless specifically provided for by the Constitution and Bylaws of the
Synod under certain conditions or situations.
Question 3: “Constitution Article XI A 1 limits the officers of the Synod only to such rights as have been
expressly conferred upon them by the Synod. Do the Board of Directors, the Secretary of
Synod, or the Vice-Presidents of Synod have the authority to direct the President in his
constitutionally mandated responsibilities?”

13