LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — September 7–8, 2006, Page 4

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

In evaluating the constitutions and bylaws of congregations, it is the responsibility of district constitution
committees to judge whether the documents are in harmony with Holy Scripture, the Confessions, and the
teachings and practices of the Synod. If a district board of directors has denied an application for
membership and the congregation has asked for reconsideration, only then does a district convention have
authority. Such authority is limited only to granting the application or affirming the denial (Bylaw 2.3.1
[c]). In doing either, however, the district convention must not violate the Constitution and Bylaws of the
Synod (cf. Art. XII 2). This appeal provision in the Synod’s Bylaws (2.3.1) does not apply to revisions of
constitutions and bylaws of congregations.
156. Southeastern District Bylaw Changes (06-2478)
The President of the Southeastern District, along with a July 19, 2006 letter, submitted the Bylaws of his
district as revised by its May, 2006 convention for review by the Commission. After initial review and
discussion, the Secretary was asked to write a letter to the district president requesting that the changes
made to the Bylaws be more clearly identified within the text of the district’s Bylaws to facilitate the
Commission’s review.
157. CCM Report to the Convention (06-2479)
The Commission discussed the content of its report to the 2007 convention in light of the report submitted
three years ago to the 2004 convention.
158. Participation in Legal Actions by Members of the Board of Directors (06-2480; 06-2480A)
A pastor of the Synod in an e-mailed letter dated August 17, 2006, submitted questions regarding actions
of members of the Board of Directors of the Synod in relation to a recent lawsuit and regarding the
vacating of positions on the Board of Directors by implementation of Bylaws 1.5.12.1 (b) (1) and (5) and
3.3.1.3 (k). In a subsequent e-mailed letter received August 18, 2006, the pastor recalled his questions.
These letters were followed by an August 20 e-mailed letter from another pastor of the Synod, who
submitted similar questions regarding the implementation of Bylaw 1.5.12.1 (b) (1) and (5).
After discussion, the Commission instructed the Secretary, although there is no clear requirement to do
so, to draft letters to legal counsel and to the Board of Directors to inform them of the questions that have
been submitted and to provide opportunity for input prior to the Commission’s response to the questions.
159. District Resolution re Dispute Resolution Process (06-2481)
The secretary of a district of the Synod brought to the attention of the Commission a resolution adopted at
his district convention which in part asks the Commission to address concerns and make necessary
improvements to the process of ecclesiastical supervision and dispute resolution and to present
recommended changes to the 2007 convention of the Synod relating to: (1) whether the requirement for a
face-to-face meeting in instances of “public offense” is contrary to paragraph 284 of the Large Catechism;
and (2) the provision in the dispute resolution process allowing for the removal of the ecclesiastical
supervisor during the process, to be replaced by an individual unfamiliar with the issue at hand and who
bears no responsibility for the member involved in the dispute.
Synod Bylaw 3.9.2 states: “The Commission on Constitutional Matters exists to interpret the
Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod and ensure that the governing instruments of the
Synod and its agencies are in accord with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.” Furthermore,
Bylaw 3.9.2.2.1 states: “The Commission on Constitutional Matters shall examine all reports and
overtures to the Synod asking for amendments to the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod or which in
110