# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_June 13 14 2014_S11
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Opinion: In response to the contention that forming a dual parish “deprives one of the congregations of its constitutional
right of suffrage,” the commission ruled in May, 1972 (Ag. 181) that “in view of the language of the Constitution in Article
V A which speaks of ‘every congregation or parish,’” the principle that “two or more congregations being served by one
pastor shall be regarded as one parish entitled to only one set of delegates” is not contrary to the Constitution and does not
cause a congregation to lose its lay delegate representation at a district convention. Rather, it shares its representation with
the other congregation(s) in the parish, presumably in a fair and equitable manner.
3. A large congregation which does not need the financial support of any other congregation, allows their pastor
to provide pulpit supply on Sunday afternoons for a small congregation which cannot afford a full-time pastor.
There are no other pastors available in the area.
Opinion: The question speaks of “pulpit supply.” It also speaks of “a small congregation which cannot afford a full-time
pastor.” Regardless of financial considerations, if the pastor is regarded by the small congregation as its pastor and speaks of
him as its pastor, and if he provides Word and Sacrament ministry, ministers to the sick and dying, etc., this and the larger
congregation are a dual parish being served by one pastor and, therefore, a parish to be represented at district conventions by
the pastor and one lay delegate. Such lay representation will be shared in a manner that presumably is fair and equitable for
both congregations.
4. Two congregations that are being served by one pastor (the pastor is called to a large congregation which
does not need any financial help to support their pastor). The large congregation allows their pastor to provide
pulpit supply on Sunday afternoons for the small congregation which cannot afford a full-time pastor, and
where no other pastor is available. The large congregation is in one visitation circuit and the small congregation
is in a different visitation circuit. Does each congregation have a lay vote at the respective circuit forum in
electing (by a voting process) a circuit counselor? If so, how is this different from voting representation at a
district convention? Does the small congregation, in effect, have to forfeit its lay vote to the district convention
to receive word and sacrament service from the large congregation?
Opinion: This question again speaks of “pulpit supply” and a “small congregation which cannot afford a full-time pastor.”
Again, if the pastor is regarded by the small congregation as its pastor and speaks of him as its pastor, and if he regularly
provides Word and Sacrament ministry, ministers to the sick and dying, etc., this and the larger congregation are a dual
parish according to the Synod’s definition, entitled to representation at district conventions by the pastor and one lay
delegate. The fact that the congregations are in separate visitation circuits has no bearing on the requirement for one pastor
and one lay delegate representation at district conventions.
Representation at circuit forums is another matter, such representation determined by Bylaw 5.3.2: “The circuit forum
consists of a pastor of each congregation and one member of each congregation designated by the congregation.” In this
case, each congregation sends a representative to its own circuit’s forum, the pastor serving as representative to the forum of
the circuit of the congregation in which he holds membership.
Regarding whether the small congregation must “forfeit” its lay vote to the district convention in order to receive Word and
Sacrament service by the pastor of the large congregation, here again it must be said that a parish arrangement does not
cause either congregation to lose its lay delegate representation at a district convention. Rather, the congregations’
representation is shared—presumably through a fair and equitable arrangement.
5. Two congregations that are being served by one pastor in a dual arrangement (both congregations are needed
to provide for a full-time pastor) where one congregation is in one district and the other in a different district.
Does one congregation have to forfeit their lay vote at their district convention because they are in a dual parish
arrangement?
Opinion: When a parish crosses district lines, it is nonetheless entitled to representation at district conventions by one pastor
and one lay member. The pastor is a voting delegate to the convention of the district of which he is a member. The lay vote
is shared by the congregations as in any other parish, presumably in a manner that is fair and equitable. The district
membership of the congregation of the lay delegate determines the district convention that he/she will attend as a voting
delegate.

47. North Dakota District Bylaw Revisions Review (14-2719)
Upon submission of revised Bylaws by the North Dakota District in preparation for its 2015 district
convention, the commission reviewed the document and offered the following recommendations or
requirements:
•

The commission noted that it has not received the district’s Articles of Incorporation for review
and requests submission of the document for review prior to the district’s 2015 convention.
CCM Minutes – June 13–14, 2014 – Page 26