LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2004, Page 279

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

STRUCTURE, PLANNING, AND ADMINISTRATION 279

regional pastoral conferences whose purpose it was to foster theo-
logical discussion as an aid to maintaining this theological unity.

At the 1848 LCMS convention, when, because distant congre-
gations were reluctant to attend due to travel time and expense, a
suggestion was made to divide into Districts, one of the main rea-
sons given in opposition was a concern that such division would
produce a hindrance for maintaining the Synod’s theological unity.

By 1853 the Synod had grown to such an extent that division
into Districts could not be postponed. The actual plan was adopted
by the Synod at its 1854 convention. Special attention was given
to the problem of maintaining theological unity in the Synod. The
solution provided was the visitation ofeach congregation, to be
done at least once every three years both by the Synod President
and by the District President.

Continued growth made this arrangement impossible, and in
1864 the visitation responsibility of the Synod President was elim-
inated except in emergencies, leaving the District President to con-
duct all visitations (1864 Proceedings, p. 4).

Within two years the Synod’s growth made it increasingly dif-
ficult for even the District Presidents to meet all of these visitation
responsibilities. The solution provided was the creation of visita-
tion Circuits of two to seven congregations, with the specifics for
how these Circuits were to be formed left to each District (1866
Proceedings, p. 85).

Rapid growth also resulted in triennial conventions of the gen-
eral Synod becoming so large that it became difficult for host con-
gregations to find enough housing for the delegates. By 1869 the
large number of delegates made it necessary to develop a plan to
hold delegate conventions. The 1872 Synod convention adopted a
resolution establishing delegate conventions, beginning in 1875,
with one pastoral and one lay delegate representing from two to
seven congregations (1872 Proceedings, pp. 96-97). This first del-
egate convention was actually held in 1874, a year earlier than
scheduled.

With the establishment of electoral Circuits in addition to visi-
tation Circuits, there was no specific indication that the makeup of
these two kinds of Circuits ought to coincide. To what extent they
did or did not coincide is difficult to determine. The fact that a res-
olution adopted by the 1917 Synod convention advocates that they
coincide as much as possible (1917 Proceedings, pp. 108-9) indi-
cates that to one degree or another they did not. A 1959 report in-
dicates that in one-third of the Districts both Circuits were usually
identical, while in the other two-thirds the two types of Circuits
were at least in some degree independent.

Bylaw 3.61 a and b of the 1979 Handbook authorizes the for-
mation of visitation Circuits and provides a means for the election
of a Counselor for these Circuits. No size and membership re-
quirements were stated for visitation Circuits. Size and member-
ship requirements were given in Bylaw 1.51, which describes elec-
toral Circuits.

With the major revision of the Handbook in 1981, Bylaw 3.61
was eliminated and Circuits were defined using the parameters of
the electoral Circuit from Bylaw 1.51 of the 1979 Handbook. Vis-
itation responsibilities were also placed in this same chapter of the
Bylaws. At the same time Bylaw 2.03 describes an electoral Circuit

as being made up of one or two adjacent visitation Circuits, which °

assumes that in some instances there will still be visitation Circuits
separate and distinct from electoral Circuits, which was the contin-
ued practice in some Districts.

In response to a series of questions from a District Secretary, the
Commission on Constitutional Matters has issued an opinion that
makes the parameters for both visitation and electoral Circuits iden-
tical. This ruling was based on Bylaw 5.01, which simply uses the
term Circuits as it sets. the parameters at 7 to 20 congregations and
1,500 to 10,000 communicant members. Thus the CCM ruling rec-
ognizes that the Bylaw change adopted by the 1981 Synod conven-
tion in effect eliminated the visitation Circuit as a smaller and sepa-
rate entity from the electoral Circuit in the structure of the Synod.

The Commission recommends the following changes to the By-
laws pertaining to Circuits in Chapters I, If], and V of the Bylaws.

Resolved, That Bylaw 5.01 be amended to read as follows:

PRESENT/PROPOSED WORDING

§.01 Structuring of Visitation Circuits

Seek A visitation Circuit shall consist of ++e20-member
such congregations within a geographical area as may be rea-
sonably served by a Circuit Counselor. Visitation Circuits are

established by action of District boards of directors. #vebire

and be it further
Resolved, That Bylaw 1.05 b be amended to read as follows:

PRESENF/PROPOSED WORDING
b. The Synod divides itself into Districts and authorizes its
Districts to create electoral Circuits as provided by Bylaw 3.03
and visitation Circuits as provided by Bylaw 5.01. The criteria
for the creation of Districts and Circuits are determined by the
Synod in convention. Districts and Circuits are included among
the component parts of the Synod.

and be it finally

Resolved, That Bylaws 5.31 through 5.37 pertaining to electoral
Circuits and their functions be incorporated into Chapter ITI of the
Bylaws to accompany its provisions for electoral Circuits.

Commission on Structure

7-87

To Require Ratification of Binding Opinions of CCM

WHEREAS, Bylaw 3.905 d provides that “an opinion rendered by
the commission [on Constitutional Matters] shall be binding on the
question decided unless and until it is overruled by a synodical con-
vention”; and

WHEREAS, The CCM has not been directed to present all of its
opinions to members of the Synod; and

WHEREAS, This makes it possible for opinions of the CCM to
become binding without formal notice to members of the Synod;
therefore be it

Resolved, That Iowa District East meeting in convention memo-
rialize the 2004 LCMS convention to require the CCM to publish
all of its opinions on the LCMS Web site so that formal notice can
be given to members of the Synod; and be it further

Resolved, That all opinions of the CCM be presented to the con-
vention for ratification at the next convention following the issue of
said opinion.

Towa District East

7-88

To Require Ratification of CCM Opinions

WHEREAS, Bylaw 3.905 d provides that “an opinion rendered by
the [C]ommission [on Constitutional Matters] shall be binding on
the question decided unless and until it is overruled by a synodical
convention”; and

WHEREAS, The CCM is not directed to present all of its opin-
ions to members of the Synod and has not done so; and

WHEREAS, This makes it possible for opinions of the CCM to
become binding without notice to members of the Synod; therefore
be it

Resolved, That the CCM be required to publish all of its opin-
ions in an official periodical, make them available on a Web site,
and include them in each convention workbook, all under CCM
headings and with proper reference numbers; and be it further

Resolved, That Bylaw 3.905 d be changed to read, “An opinion
rendered by the commission shall not be binding beyond the next