# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1975_S210 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) 210 CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS that regardless of where the responsibilities would be placed, adequate provision for the discharge of their responsibilities would nevertheless have to be made. In view of this, the committee, in terms of further work it intends to do with respect to the potential merger of boards and commissions, recommends that the convention adopt New Orleans Res. 4-29 (Proceedings. 1973, p. 156). 12. Res. 5-22 Election of Vice-Presidents and Involvement of District Presidents Two similar memorials presented to the New Orleans con- vention asked that a special study committee be established to investigate whether possible ways of electing the Vice- Presidents and ways of involving the District Presidents in all the affairs of the church could be provided. The New Orleans Floor Committee, in Res. 5-22, recommended to that convention that the overtures be declined: however, lack of time did not allow the convention to act upon them and hence this resolu- tion, too, was transferred to the committee via the route of the omnibus resolution assigned to the Board of Directors. The committee reviewed the overtures and the proposed resolution and consequently recommends to the Anaheim convention that it adopt New Orleans Res. 5-22 (Proceedings. 1973, p.171), thereby declining the overtures. 13. Res. 5-24 Appointment of Commission on Constitutional Matters The Milwaukee convention assigned to the committee several matters dealing with the Commission on Constitutional Matters. These included the appointing authority, tenure of office and membership, serving on additional boards and commissions of the Synod and its Districts. The committee studied all of these issues, checked for possible conflict of interest, considered additional suggestions which had been made in specific over- tures, including that the Council of Presidents appoint the commission and whether the commission should be elected by a convention. It presented its findings together with an appro- priate resolution to the New Orleans convention. The Floor Committee concurred in these recommendations and proposed Res. 5-24 for adoption. As in the case of other resolutions, this one could not be acted upon and via the Board of Directors was referred back to this committee. The committee reopened all of the issues, studied the role of the synodical Secretary and the tenure and pedigree of the commission members. After reevaluating all of these matters, the committee recommends to the Anaheim convention that New Orleans Res. 5-24 | Proceed- ings, 1973, p. 171) be adopted. 14. Res. 5-26 Clarifying Bylaws 1.57 and 1.61 The committee studied the terminology of Bylaws 1.57 and 1.61 because questions of interpretation had arisen. In order to clarify the terminology, the committee had proposed revisions in both of these sections to the New Orleans convention. The Floor Committee had formulated Res. 5-26 which, however, could not be acted upon. In Omnibus Resolution 4-47 it was referred to the Board of Directors, which in turn referred it back to the committee. The committee extensively reviewed the issues, which included the following considerations: that the Constitution and Bylaws grant advisory members of the Synod the right to be represented at conventions of the Synod, that advisory members should not have tuo opportunities to be selected as delegates to a convention, that the main thrust of the proposal was to clear up the difficulty involved, and that the differences between advisory delegates and advisory represen- tatives need to be sharpened in the Handbook terminology. The committee, in its review, was determined to eliminate the intermingling of delegates as constituted by 1.57 and 1.61, or vice-versa, particularly in three areas: (1) in determining the number of advisory delegates from a District, (2) in specify- ing the participation in the selection of such advisory delegates or representatives, and (3) in determining the eligibility to serve as advisory delegates. In view of all these considerations, the committee resubmits to the Anaheim convention for adoption New Orleans Res. 5-26 (Proceedings, 1973, p. 171—72}. 15. Res. 5-34 District President Elections Two New Orleans overtures (5-78 and 5-79: Workbook. 1973, p. 234) suggested that the District Presidents be elected at synodical conventions. The committee felt that the election of District Presidents, though at one time held at synodical con- ventions, ought to remain one of the primary points of business of the Districts. Having determined this, the committee recom- mends to the Anaheim convention that it adopt New Orleans Res. 5-34 (Proceedings. 1973, p. 173). 16. Res. 5-42 Limit Binding Nature of Opinions New Orleans Res. 5-42 had emanated from several overtures (Workbook. 1973, pp. 237-38). The New Orleans Floor Com- mittee had proposed Res. 5-42, but no action could be taken in response for lack of time: thus it too was referred to the Board of Directors in Omnibus Resolution 4-47 and hence to this committee. Res. 5-42 encourages the Commission on Con- stitutional Matters “to publish such of its opinions which it deems of general interest and effect in carrying out the work and administration of the Synod.” The Committee examined all aspects of the overtures and also of the proposed resolution. In terms of these ramified considerations, the committee recom- mends to the Anaheim convention that it adopt Res. 5-42 (Pro- ceedings. 1973, p. 175). 17. Res. 5-36 Youth Representation and Student Participation Several overtures had come before the Milwaukee conven- tion dealing with these issues. That convention referred these matters to the Board of Directors, which in turn referred them to the committee. In response to that assignment, the committee made its proposals to the New Orleans convention, which the Floor Committee adopted and presented to the convention in Res. 5-36. The resolution, regrettably, could not be adopted for lack of time and thus it also was referred in Omnibus Resolu- tion 4-47 to the Board of Directors, which referred it back to this committee. Elements which the committee reviewed for a second time included: that floor-speaking privileges should be limited to the voting and advisory delegates and representatives: that the ‘advisory representatives” detailed in Bylaw 1.61 represent the working force of the Synod reporting to the Synod on how it has carried out the Synod's directives: that representation from our colleges and seminaries should come from those who are responsible for the operation, namely from the Boards of Con- trol and the faculties rather than the student body: that both youth and student representatives would appear inconsistent with logic and with the constitutional philosophy of the Synod: that the responsibilities of the youth and students do not at all measure up to those of the many board and commission mem- bers and executives who are engaged in the work of the Synod and of the Districts: that these young people are members of congregations and, with the lowered voting age, this makes it possible for many young people to be chosen by their congrega- tions as delegates of the congregations to the conventions of the Districts and of the Synod. In view of this, it does not seem logical and in harmony with the policy principles of the Synod to grant these young people special privileges or status on the floor of the convention: nevertheless, your committee strongly believes that the atten- dance at the convention of these young people (students and youth representatives) is beneficial. Therefore, in order to provide this opportunity for them and in order to be consistent with the constitutional principles of the Synod, your committee recommends the adoption New Orleans Res. 5-36 (Proceedings. 1973, p. 174). 18. Res. 5-37 Study Office of District President The New Orleans Floor Committee in formulating Res. 5-37 responded to Overture 5-62 (Workbook, 1973, pp. 228—29), which had suggested that a study be made of the office of the District President in order to make his service more realistic to the whole church. Regrettably, the Floor Committee’s resolu- tion could not be adopted at New Orleans for lack of time and it too was referred to the Board of Directors in Omnibus Resolu- tion 4-47. The Committee for Reorganization received this matter by referral from the Board of Directors. In reviewing the issues recommended in the original overture and examining the response of the Floor Committee, particularly in light of the recommendation already made by the Committee for Reorganization with respect to New Orleans Res. 5-21 (see 10 above), the committee believes that it logically follows Over- ture 5-62. The committee proposes to the Anaheim convention that it adopt Res. 5-37 (Proceedings. 1973, p. 174).