LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2013, Page 318

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

318

OPINIONS OF COMMISSION ON CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS
senting an overture to a circuit forum calling for the revision or recision of a doctrinal resolution or statement of the Synod.
Question 1.2:	Would there be a difference if the circuit forum member who made the motion to place the matter in question before the circuit forum were a layperson?

Opinion: The process of dissent in Bylaws 1.8.1 and 1.8.2 applies
only to members (individuals and congregations) of the Synod.
Such an overture could not be submitted by a layperson unless
done on behalf of a congregation which had previously followed
the process.
Question 1.3:	Before a circuit forum adopts the kind of overture
mentioned in item 1 above, would it be incumbent
upon that circuit forum to take the steps enjoined
upon members of the Synod in Bylaw section 1.8?
If so, who is the “peer” of a circuit forum? Would
two or more circuit forums have to hold official joint
meetings for discussion?
Opinion: Since a circuit forum is not a member of the Synod but
rather a channel through which a member of the Synod submits such
an overture, the provisions of Bylaw 1.8.2 do not apply to those
present and voting at the circuit forum.

Statement 2: An agency of the Synod (especially but not limited
to a district, through its convention, or a circuit forum) submits to the
Synod in convention an overture that calls upon the Synod to revise
or rescind a doctrinal resolution adopted by the Synod.
Question 2.1:	Must every member of a circuit forum, agency of
the Synod (including a district), or district or Synod
floor committee considering such an overture participate in the Bylaw 1.8.2 steps of dissent required
of a member of the Synod before that circuit forum,
agency, or floor committee can submit such an overture to a convention?
Opinion: As stated above, neither a circuit forum nor a district
convention is a member of the Synod, but rather a proper channel
through which a member presents his/her/its concerns. After a member involved in the Bylaw 1.8.2 process has initiated a matter and an
overture is before a convention, the matter no longer belongs to the
individual. The individual who initiated the process is not required
to participate.
Question 2.2:	
As a related question, Bylaw 1.8.2 mentions an
“overture to the convention” (emphasis added to
highlight the definite article). To which convention?
Is “the convention” in view here exclusively the national convention (which is the only convention that
can actually revise or rescind a doctrinal resolution
adopted by the Synod) or does “the convention” include any convention of the synod at the national or
district level, i.e., also district conventions?
Opinion: Ultimately it is a convention of the Synod that decides the
matter. However, such an overture could also be presented to a district convention as an appropriate channel through which the matter
is presented to a convention of the Synod.

Statement 3: At a circuit forum or district convention, a pastor (an
individual member of the Synod) casts a vote in favor of (a) a properly
submitted motion that calls upon the district to memorialize the Synod
to revise or rescind a doctrinal resolution adopted by the Synod, or
(b) a properly submitted motion that calls upon the Synod to revise
or rescind a doctrinal resolution adopted by the Synod.
Question 3.1:	Is it relevant whether this pastor had previously discussed his point of dissent within the
fellowship of peers and brought this matter to
the attention of the CTCR and expressed his
2013 Convention Workbook

dissent in the form of an overture for convention consideration?
Statement 4: At a convention of the Synod, a pastor (an individual
member of the Synod) casts a vote in favor of a properly submitted
motion by which the Synod revises or rescinds a doctrinal resolution
adopted by the Synod.
Question 4.1:	Is it relevant whether this pastor had previously discussed his point of dissent within the fellowship of
peers and brought this matter to the attention of the
CTCR and expressed his dissent in the form of an
overture for convention consideration?
Opinion: Statements 3 and 4 and the questions that follow each
statement (referencing those in attendance at circuit forums or conventions who vote on the overture) are irrelevant because neither a
circuit forum nor a district convention is a member of the Synod,
and such voting at a circuit forum or district convention is part of
the process by which such an overture from a member comes to a
convention of the Synod, where delegates decide the issue voting
according to their own convictions.

(Adopted May 11–13, 2012)

District Convention Registration Fees (12-2649)
With an emailed June 2, 2012 letter, a pastor of the Synod submitted a series of questions and supplemental information regarding a
district’s requirement that convention fees be paid prior to the registration and accreditation of delegates.
Question 1: May a district charge a registration fee to delegates of a
district convention?
Opinion: There is no provision in the Handbook of the Synod that
addresses the subject of charging a registration fee to delegates to
conventions. It is, however, common practice in the Synod for districts to request payment of convention registration fees by district
congregations in order to offset the operating costs of the district
convention. This practice resembles (but is not identical to) the national Synod’s practice of offsetting convention costs by various
means including a “district levy per communicant member” (Bylaw
3.1.9 [d]).
Question 2: May attendance at such district convention be contingent
upon payment of a registration fee?
Opinion: Past commissions have already issued two opinions on
this issue. In its March 13, 1992 opinion (Ag. 1928), in response to
an inquiry regarding a proposed change to a district bylaw (“Only
those congregations that have paid their convention registration
fee by the opening of the convention shall have their delegates
seated”), the commission opined:
In responding to this question, the commission notes that Bylaw
4.23 accrediting of delegates [see 2010 Bylaw 4.2.2 (a)] deals with the
accreditation of such delegates at the district convention. It states, “The
delegates of a voting congregation shall stand accredited and entitled to
vote upon presenting to the secretary at the opening of the convention
the proper credentials provided by the district secretary and signed by
two of the congregation’s officers…” The commission notes that at neither the synodical nor the district level does certification involve finances as one of the requirements for certification. While the congregation
can rightly be expected to pay the assessment, that payment cannot be
required for the certification and seating of delegates. Such accreditation
cannot be conditioned on the payment of money.
The commission would note that the concept of a synod, of which
the district is a part, involves that of walking together. This is reflected
in Bylaw 2.39 b [2010 Bylaw 1.7.2], which states:
The Synod expects every member congregation to respect its
resolutions and to consider them of binding force if they are in accordance with the Word of God and if they appear applicable as far