LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — July 13–19, 2007, Page 17

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

During the 1983 convention, the issue arose regarding proposed bylaws establishing a Board of
Theological Education and a separate Commission on Church Literature. The opinion included the
following:
In the case of the proposal for a Board of Theological Education, the Commission ruled that these
proposed bylaws had not been submitted to the Commission on Constitutional Matters for
clearance prior to presentation to the convention (Bylaw 14.01 d) and could not therefore
properly be brought before the convention.
In the case of the proposed Commission on Church Literature, the Commission ruled that since
the proposal and the proposed bylaws had not been submitted to the President of the Synod no
less than sixteen weeks prior to the opening date of the convention, it could not properly come
before the convention unless it were adjudged a matter of overriding importance and urgency and
had been accepted for convention consideration by the committee consisting of the President,
First Vice-President, and Secretary of the Synod (Bylaw 2.19 2 b). Furthermore, the Commission
ruled that it could not be properly considered because it had not been submitted to the
Commission on Constitutional Matters for clearance prior to presentation to the convention
(Bylaw 14.01 d).
In 1997, the bylaw now numbered 7.1.1 (d) was considered as the basis for a proposed special standing
rule which read:
The chair shall require written or oral certification that proposed constitutional or bylaw
amendments have been examined by the Commission on Constitutional Matters and found not to
be in conflict with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.
The process required for amending the Bylaws is contained in Bylaw 7.1.1 (a) which requires that said
amendments be presented in writing to the convention. Paragraph (b) requires that such bylaw changes
are specifically identified as bylaw amendments, and that they be considered by a convention floor
committee. Bylaw 3.1.7 (f) then requires the floor committee to consider the proposed amendment and
report its findings and recommendations to the convention. Next, Bylaw 7.1.1 (c) requires that such
amendments must be considered by the Commission on Constitutional Matters prior to presentation to a
convention.
Question 2:

May a convention of the Synod consider a minor amendment to a proposed
amendment to the bylaws (which proposed amendment has been moved by the Synod
in compliance with Bylaw 7.1.1) without following the provisions of Bylaw 7.1.1?

Opinion: All amendments to the Bylaws must follow the process of Bylaw 7.1.1. No exception has been
made in the bylaw for “minor” amendments. However, if the “minor” amendment is considered by the
floor committee as fairly within the scope of that which the floor committee considered prior to bringing
the matter to the floor, and is within the scope of what the Commission on Constitutional Matters
examined in advance and found not to be in conflict with the Constitution and Bylaws, no separate
referral need be made.
220. Adjournment
The business of the Commission was concluded when the final session of the convention was adjourned.

Raymond L. Hartwig, Secretary
166