# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_October 21 22 2002_S26
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

It is the responsibility, therefore, of the District’s constitution committee to work with a congregation that
has submitted changes to its constitution and bylaws to ascertain that the provisions are in harmony with
Holy Scripture, the Confessions, and the teachings and practices of the Synod.” If the committee is
concerned that such harmony does not exist, it must continue to work with the congregation, using
resources at its disposal such as the “GUIDELINES for the Constitution and Bylaws of a Congregation”
published by this Commission, or by consulting with the Commission on Theology and Church Relations
of the Synod in the case of doctrinal or confessional questions.
Finally, when the committee has done all that it can do for the sake of harmony between the proposed
constitution and bylaws and Holy Scripture, the Confessions, and the teachings and practices of the
Synod, the committee provides a report to the District President. He makes a recommendation to the
District Board of Directors, whose responsibility it is to make a final decision (Bylaw 2.03 b).
Should the District Board of Directors decide that the proposed changes to the constitution and bylaws of
the congregation are not in harmony with Holy Scripture, the Confessions, and the teachings and practices
of the Synod and therefore decline to approve the changes, the congregation must continue to use its
existing constitution and bylaws until such time as approval can be obtained. All actions of District
boards of directors regarding constitutions and bylaws of congregations “shall be reported to the next
convention of the District” (Bylaw 2.03 b).
In response to the particular questions asked regarding the use of specific terminology in light of its usage
in the Lutheran Confessions, the District committee is advised to consult with the Commission on
Theology and Church Relations. Regarding approval of the use of particular terminology in constitutions
and bylaws elsewhere in the Synod, the Commission on Constitutional Matters does not have such
information and suggests consultation with the Council of Presidents.
95. Consequences of Ecclesiastical Supervision (02-2309)
A District President in a September 27, 2002 letter that included the signatures of twelve other members
of the Council of Presidents requested an opinion regarding the consequences of following the advice of
an ecclesiastical supervisor. Noting that other similar requests for opinions have been submitted that
should also be taken into consideration in preparing a response, the Commission decided to defer action
on this request to a later time.
96. Clarification of 2001 Resolution 7-03C (02-2310)
A pastor of the Synod in an October 2, 2002 letter asked for clarification of Resolution 7-03C of the 2001
convention and questions its constitutionality. After consideration of proposed responses, the Commission
decided to defer action on this request to a later time.
97. Accountability of Officers to Conventions of the Synod (02-2311)
A pastor of the Synod in an October 11, 2002 letter questions a recent ruling of the Commission (022263) in which the Commission stated: “Further complaints under Bylaw 2.27 g cannot be brought before
a convention of the Synod since the bylaws created under the authorization of Article XIII 2 make no
provision for the dispute to be resolved by a convention of the Synod.” He noted that Bylaw 3.73 states:
“All officers, boards, and commissions shall be accountable to the Synod for all their actions, and any
decision of such officers, boards, and commissions may be appealed to the national convention of the
Synod.” After consideration of proposed responses, the Commission decided to defer action on this
request to a later time.

74