# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_June 18 2010_S1
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS
Teleconference Call Meeting
June 18, 2010
168. Call to Order, Opening Prayer
Chairman Albert Marcis called the meeting to order with all members of the commission
participating in the telephone conference call. He called on Raymond Hartwig to open the
meeting with prayer.
169. Circuit Representation at National Conventions (10-2580)
In a June 1, 2010 e-mailed letter to the chairman of the commission, a district president
submitted two questions regarding circuit representation at national conventions:
Question 1: Bylaw 3.1.2.1 (a) states, “Each electoral circuit shall meet at the call of the
counselor(s) to elect its delegates not later than nine months prior to the opening
day of the convention.”
If a circuit meets and elects its delegates after the deadline (in this specific instance,
about one week after the deadline) and immediately reports its election to the
district secretary according to Bylaw 3.1.2.1 (i), and if the provisions in Bylaw
3.1.3.2 were met, and if the reporting deadline set by the Secretary of the Synod to
report delegates to his office is met, are the elected delegates eligible to serve?
Opinion: Bylaw 3.1.2.1 contains a series of requirements for the valid election of delegates to a
national convention of the Synod. Prior opinions of the CCM have affirmed that an election
failing to follow any of the requirements, including the time restrictions, is ineffective in the
election of a delegate. One of the requirements for election of a delegate is that such election take
place not later than nine (9) months prior to the opening day of the convention. An attempted
election after the time deadline is therefore ineffective to elect a delegate.
As noted in the question, Bylaw 3.1.2.1(i) directs the circuit counselor to report the results of the
election to the secretary of the district in writing immediately after the election, and Bylaw
3.1.3.2 then requires the secretary of the district to certify those elected to the Secretary of the
Synod before the announced registration deadline, which deadline is not specified in the Bylaws.
As such, the fact that the certification went to the secretary of the Synod by the arbitrary deadline
set by him does not affect the validity or invalidity of the circuit’s election. Rather, the validity
of the election is dependent on compliance with the provisions of Bylaw 3.1.2.1.
Bylaw 3.1.2.1(j) allows appointment by a district president in some instances of defective
elections. However, in each of those prior instances considered by the CCM where that right was
recognized, an election was held in a timely manner, but was defective in some other respect. In
those instances where an election was not even held before the deadline, no “vacancy” has been
previously recognized, and in fact a number of prior opinions reflect an express recognition that
forfeiture of representation would be the natural result of failure to hold the timely election.