# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1973_S210 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS 209 3. To give a lay vote to the second and third congrega- tion in a dual or multiple parish; 4. To grant the vote to campus pastors and other pastors who currently qualify only as advisory delegates with- out vote; 5. To make attendance of advisory members of the Synod at District conyentions optional. The first four questions deal with the franchise at syn- odical conventions. The fifth deals with the question of at- tendance of advisory members at District conventions. In its study of the first four questions, the Committee considered the following: The Synod is primarily an association of congregations which have joined together in order to achieve certain ob- jectives. Therefore, the membership of the Synod consists first of all of congregations. The vote at synodical conven- tions is held by them. Pastors and teachers who join the Synod are also accorded membership, but this may be re- garded as a professional membership, distinct from the vot- ing membership held by the congregations. (See Article V) When the Constitution defines voting membership in Ar- ticle V A, it emphasizes that “every congregation or parish is entitled to two votes” at the District conventions, “one of which is to be cast by the pastor and the other by the lay delegate.” At synodical conventions, a number of congrega- tions comprise an electoral circuit, again represented by two voting delegates, one a pastoral and one a lay delegate. From this it follows that each congregation has two votes. one pastoral and the other lay. Thus, if two or more asso- ciate pastors serve a congregation, it determines which pas- tor shall exercise its pastoral vote at a District convention. Similarly, in the election of delegates to the synodical con- vention, the representatives of the congregations determine which pastor in the circuit will represent the congregations of the circuit. The pastors in the circuit do not choose one of their number to represent them. It is understandable that sentiment may be strong to grant additional lay votes to the larger congregation. But this would destroy the delegate balance of one lay and one pas- toral vote residing in the congregation as provided in the Constitution. The committee believes that the matter of permitting larger congregations to have several lay votes is equitably provided for in Bylaw 1.51 which states that electoral circuits may consist of from 7 to 20 member con- gregations, involving an aggregate communicant membership ranging from 1,500 to 10,000. The problem of large congre- gations having no greater voice than small congregations is solved, in part, by the fact that electoral circuits of large congregations can be composed of fewer congregations while larger numbers of smaller congregations are required in or- der to form an electoral circuit. Nevertheless. the committee is recommending that the formula for the number of com- municant members and the number of congregations in an electoral circuit be kept under constant review. To grant a lay vote to the second and third congregation in a multiple parish also will destroy the constitutional dele- gate balance providing for one lay and one pastoral vote. Furthermore, it would aggravate the resentment that is held in some quarters over the fact that larger congregations have no greater voice or vote than smaller congregations. The committee therefore feels that continuation of the pres- ent constitutional provision is the wisest. The committee defines a “multiple parish” as one con- sisting of two or more congregations served by a single pastor either temporarily or permanently. A congregation, on the other hand, is defined as a single community of be- lievers. formally organized under a constitution, which may be served by one or more pastors. To grant the vote to campus pastors and others working in a nonparish related ministry and designated as “advisory members” in the Constitution, Article V B, and in the Bylaws 1.57 and 1.61, the committee feels, would create massive inequities by supplying the convention with a large number of votes from the professional workers in the church and destroy the historic balance between the professional and lay vote, and create clergy dominance. In addition, granting the vote to advisory members of the Synod would destroy the concept of congregational franchise. However, the pres- ence and participation of advisory members without vote at the conventions is both beneficial to them and to their fellow members. After carefully weighing the suggestions offered in the overtures listed above, the committee presents to the con- vention recommendations which will continue to recognize the congregations of the Synod as the seat of the legislative authority. The committee recommends adoption of the fol- lowing: 1. That the historic balance of one pastoral vote and one lay vote be retained (Constitution, Article V A); 2. That in case of multiple parishes, voting privileges con- tinue to be extended on the basis of one pastoral and one Jay vote for the entire parish; 3. That the current requirements (Bylaw 1.51) concern- ing the number of communicant members and number of congregations in electoral circuits be retained for the present but be subject to ongoing review by the Commission on Constitutional Matters: 4. That the franchise not be extended to individuals but continue to rest with the member congregations as the Con- stitution presently prescribes in Article V A, and Article IX. 5. That attendance on the part of advisory members of the Synod at District conventions continue to be expected since an adequate provision for being excused is incorporated in the Bylaws. Biographical Data on Nominations The committee had also been assigned a study of the “Biographical information available at convention elections” (Proceedings. 1971, minutes. p.31). It addressed itself to the question of providing biographical information on the nom- inees as these currently appear in the convention Workbook, designated to enable the delegates to exercise their fran- chise. The committee was aware that at the Milwaukee convention delegates were asked to vote on more than 260 nominees of which the majority were probably unknown to them. The committee felt that something ought to be done to improve the situation. As the committee examined the pros and cons, it found on the one hand: more information is needed on a man’s background, competence and qualifications for the office, ete.: uninformed voting often results in the election of a man bv chance, by his position in the alphabet, or because of having a well-known name. On the other hand, the nominating committee already has a formidable task. and for them to provide even more information may not be feasible: there is probably no way by which delegates could be fully informed on all nominees: and expanding this information too much could promote a form of campaigning. The committee also consulted various groups in its efforts to find ways to provide additional data and information on the candidates, but it could not reach any realistic conclu- sions and recommendations. In view of this, the committee recommends to the New Orleans convention: 1. To retain the present procedure, but that the maximum data on the candidates be presented in a more understand- able and readable form, and that the information of the candidates’ service to the local congregation be reduced; 2. That the New Orleans convention provide for a Com- mittee which will continue to study matters dealing with convention nominations and elections for report to a sub- sequent convention. The Use of Referenda The Milwaukee convention asked the Committee on Or- ganization to study the matter raised in Resolution 5-11 (Proceedings. 1971, p.155). This included Overture 5-65 which requested that member congregations of the Synod “be given the right to vote on any and all convention reso- lutions that would authorize affiliation or association with other church bodies, synods, or federations” and requiring two-thirds favorable vote by member congregations before such resolutions would become effective. Since the Council of Presidents was also given this assignment in Res. 5-40 (Proceedings. 1971, p.168) and will present an overture on this matter, the Committee on Organization does not feel it necessary for it also to make a recommendation.