# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_June 6 7 2008_S6
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)



Under 4.03, the requirement (paragraph c) that circuits “shall” hold circuit pastors’ conferences
on a regular basis exceeds the expectations of Synod Bylaw 4.9.1 where “may” language is used.



Under 5.03, amendments to district bylaws are said to be subject to review by the Commission on
Constitutional Matters “for final approval.” Synod Bylaw 3.9.2.2.4 instead requires that all such
proposed amendments be “examine[d] in advance.”

44. Southern District Bylaws (08-2513)
With a letter dated January 7, 2008, the secretary of the Southern District submitted proposed changes to
the district’s bylaws. The commission reviewed the documents received from the district, calling attention
to the following in light of the Synod’s Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions:



In Article III of the Articles of Incorporation, it would be more accurate to list as the members of
the corporation “the congregations, ordained ministers, and commissioned ministers,” since
commissioned ministers include categories in addition to “teachers.”
In Article V of the Articles of Incorporation, the definition of parishes as two or more
congregations “united under one pastor” is not entirely accurate since the congregations remain
separate entities. It would be more correct to speak of two or more congregations “served by one
pastor.”



In Article VI of the Articles of Incorporation, the last sentence does not read well as it stands.



In Article X of the Articles of Incorporation, mention should be made of the requirement of
Synod Bylaw 3.9.2.2.4 that all proposed amendments are to be examined in advance by the
Synod’s Commission on Constitutional Matters.



In the Preamble to the Bylaws, the stated definition of the Southern District in the first sentence is
not a proper definition as it stands, since the district is the Synod in that place and the Synod is
made up of its member congregations and church workers.



Under Article II of the Bylaws, paragraph H d regarding required attendance at official
conferences would better read that absentees are to submit requests to be excused in writing to the
Excuse Committee.



Under Article III of the Bylaws, paragraph B 1 (also IV B 1), having the Board of Directors “be
responsible for the implementation and coordination of the total mission and ministry” contradicts
the ecclesiastical supervisory responsibilities of the president of a district.



Under Article III of the Bylaws, paragraph B 4, mention of vacancies on the board of directors as
a result of “removal” begs the question of how board members may be removed. This is an issue
yet to be resolved by the Synod in convention. The CCM recommends that such mentions be
deleted until a convention of the Synod has opportunity to take an appropriate action on behalf of
the entire Synod.



Under Article IV of the Bylaws, paragraph A 4, specific mention of “appointive staff personnel”
being “engaged on a contract basis” should be examined in light of Synod Bylaw section 3.11 and
its requirements for a call under specific circumstances.



Under Article V of the Bylaws, paragraph C 3, consistent use of Synod bylaw language would
suggest changing the verbiage “member of the clergy” to “ordained minister.”



Under proposed bylaw revisions, Article III, paragraph B 2 a, it would be more appropriate to
speak of a “member-at-large” in place of a “delegate-at-large.”

29