# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_April 21 22 2007_S2
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

purpose. It was agreed that the Commission will share the results of its review with the Board of
Directors, since the board also has been given policy manual responsibilities by the Bylaws of the
Synod.
189. Review of Southeastern District Bylaws (06-2478)
Bylaw 3.9.2.2.4 requires all agencies of the Synod to submit to the Commission in advance all
proposed amendments to articles of incorporation and bylaws for its examination to ascertain that
they are in harmony with the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod. Although a
number of amendments were already approved by its 2006 Southeastern District convention, the
Commission reviewed the changes and offers the following responses.
In the following case, the Commission finds the amendment to be contrary to the Constitution,
Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod and therefore should not be considered in force until
appropriate changes have been made and approved by a convention of the district:
•

In the Preamble section to the Bylaws, line 31, the Commission notes that the provision
to support Recognized Services Organizations in their mission and ministry is placed on
the same level as support to congregations of the district. This is contrary to the Bylaws
of the Synod where it is clear that such organizations are recognized for their support of
the mission and ministry of the Synod and not vice versa (Bylaw 6.2.1) and where it is
clear that it is the purpose of the Synod to support above all its member congregations
(Bylaw 1.1.1 [a]). Therefore, while supporting ministries of recognized service
organizations is a good thing, such support is not intended to rise to the level advocated
in the district’s document.

In the following cases, the Commission has noticed statements in newly amended or already
existing sections of the district’s Bylaws for which additional attention by the district is
recommended:
•

In the Preamble section, line 42, although this is not one of the newly amended
paragraphs, the statement that the district “is a voluntary association of congregations…”
is not entirely accurate. Congregations voluntarily join and retain membership in the
Synod, and it is the Synod that is the voluntary association of congregations.
Congregations belong to the Synod, and such membership is held through a district,
which is the Synod in that place.

•

Under Article IV, lines 130ff., the Commission has noted inconsistency in statements
regarding number of directors, sometimes said to be “seven,” but in this article
potentially eight. The district may also want to give further consideration to the
terminology in its provision for “an ethnic member” on its board of directors, it being
unclear what is intended since all persons are “ethnic” in the strict sense of the word.

•

Under Article V, lines 206 and 209, the proper terminology for commissioned ministers
is “ministers of religion–commissioned.”

•

Under Article VI, line 290, the Commission suggests that by providing that vicepresidents are required to perform duties as requested by the board of directors, while
this may be technically appropriate, the clear lines the Synod tries to maintain between
ecclesiastical responsibilities (the usual bailiwick of vice-presidents in our Synod
structure) and business responsibilities (reserved to a large extent to boards of directors
and not usually included in the duties of vice-presidents) may be blurred.

125