# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_September 28 1952_S2
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Fourth Meeting of the Committee on Constitutional Matters 3. 10
the By-Laws, Section 5.23, last sentence, makes it the duty of the First District
Vice-President to initiate proceedings in such a case. Attention was also called
to the fact that the Constitution of Synod is also the Constitution of the Dist-
ricts. (Article XII, 2e) Therefore it has been maintained that the District
President has the same duties as assigned to the President under Article XI, B.
The committee concurred in the opinion that the President of Synod is not involved
in a case until it has been considered by the Board of Appeals, which may finally
refer it to the President, as stipulated in Section 5.113. It must be remembered
that according to Article XIII of the Constitution the District is to act in cases

of expulsion, as a rule, while provision is made for an appeal to Synod. If the

District officials do not do their duty, they are to be admonished by the Presi-

dent of Synod, in order to induce them to act.

4. Matters concerning the electoral circuits (Sections 1.51 and 1.53)
are bring much discussed in Synod. The fundamental law is found in Article IX
and Article V, A.of the Constitution. It has been suggested that the Districts
form electoral units and choose two delegates, a pastor and 4 lay-delegate, for
each twenty-one congregations or fraction thereof. The Committee on Constitu-
tional Matters holds that the congregations and not the Districts are to elect the
delegates to the synodical convention. The electoral circuits are circuits of
Synod and not of the District. Electoral circuits are to elect their delegates,
but the District will be asked to ratify such election, whether made during or
before the District convention. The question of enlarging the electoral circuits,
perhaps to comprise 15 to 20 congregations instead of 10 to 15 is being studied |
by a special committee.

B. The Critique of Dr. Dierks of our opinion concerning the protest of
his congregation and that of Trinity Church in Oak Park had been studied by all
members of the committee. Since the critique shows that our “opinion” was evident
ly misunderstood by Dr. Dierks, the committee re-studied the wording of the opinio
drawn up in our May 18th meeting and tried to clarify its position to avoid furthe

misunderstanding. The revised opinion is to be sent to Dr. Behnken with the re-