# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_February 10 12 2012_S10
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Upon review of the Bylaws of the district and proposed amendments, the commission offered the
following recommendations, using for reference the bylaw numbers accompanying the proposed bylaw
changes.
•
•
•
•
•
•

•

•
•

•

•

•

•
•

Preamble: The district is advised to omit reference to the particular year of the Handbook in the
parenthetical references, thereby to avoid the need for wholesale amendments following every
Synod convention.
Bylaw 1.2: Mention of “Each congregation” must also include the words “or multiplecongregation parish” at the beginning of the paragraph.
Bylaw 3.1: Synod Constitution Art. XII 9 (d) gives primary responsibility for the signing of
official documents to the president of the district, which should be reflected in this bylaw.
Bylaw 4.1: The listing of elected officers of the district must also include the circuit counselors.
This will also require clarification in the final sentence of the bylaw, which would otherwise
make circuit counselors voting members of the board of directors of the district.
Bylaw 4.2: This bylaw leaves unclear the intention of the bylaw by its use of the term “pastors,”
which in Synod parlance refers only to parish pastors (vs. ordained ministers in general).
Bylaw 4.3, et al.: Use of the term “board” as in “board of nominations” contradicts the Synod’s
bylaw use of the term “nominating committee” (Synod Bylaw 4.7.2) and the Synod’s general use
of the terms “board” vs. “committee.” The same holds true for the “board of constitution review”
in the bylaws that follow.
Bylaw 4.4: The new wording that has the constitution committee of the district submitting its
approval directly to the district board of directors is not entirely accurate. The committee advises
the president of the district regarding constitutions and bylaws that have been submitted. He then
makes a recommendation to the district board of directors regarding approval (see Synod Bylaw
2.4.1 [c]).
Bylaw 4.9.2: This bylaw should begin with words such as “Unless otherwise specified in these
bylaws” in order to allow for the fact that circuit counselor vacancies, for example, are filled by
the president of the district (Synod Bylaw 5.2.2.1).
Bylaws 5.1.1 and 5.1.2: The content of these bylaws does not represent completely or accurately
the content of the Synod’s Bylaws regarding the district president’s ecclesiastical responsibilities,
as in Constitution Art. XII and Bylaw section 4.4. It also does not clarify his responsibilities with
regard to district committees (district Bylaw 8.1).
Bylaw 6.1: It should be noted that the “general supervision” discussed in the fourth sentence of
the first paragraph is not to include the ecclesiastical supervision carried out by the president of
the district. In paragraph j, the commission notes mention of a policy manual and therefore
requests a copy for review (Synod Bylaw 3.9.2.2.3).
Bylaw 8.1: The commission notes mention of a “schematic diagram” adopted by the district and
requests a copy for review. Regarding the mention of “standing committees,” the description and
responsibilities of such committees that are provided in Synod Bylaw 1.5.3.4 should be noted and
reflected.
Bylaw 11.4: The reference to “lay delegate of the district and school” is unclear and requires
attention, since schools do not have lay delegates. It should also be stated that the delegate
credential/registration cards must be signed by two officers of the congregation (Synod Bylaw
4.2.2).
Bylaw 11.9: The reference to Roberts Rules of Order should also speak of “the most recent
edition of” or clarify which edition will be used, since new editions are published periodically.
Bylaw 12.1: The parenthetical reference to Synod Bylaw 3.1.2 should also include Synod Bylaw
3.1.2.1, the latter providing the detailed process for election of Synod convention delegates.
244