LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — July 10–11, 2009, Page 5

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Diverse Contemporary Worship Resources” is not subject to doctrinal review. The following are the
applicable bylaws:
Material Subject to Doctrinal Review
1.9.1.1 The following materials are subject to doctrinal review:
(a) All official periodicals and journals of the Synod as well as any material with doctrinal
content issued publicly by boards, commissions, or other subordinate groups of the Synod
except as stipulated in these Bylaws shall be subject to doctrinal review….
(g) Official reports of the boards, commissions, task forces, and committees of the Synod
prepared in response to directives from the Synod shall not be subject to doctrinal review.
The referenced Commission on Worship report is clearly an official report prepared, following input
solicited from doctrinal review, in response to a directive of the Synod. This report evaluated songs
previously published by others. While the songs referenced in the report were doctrinally evaluated, the
materials cited were not subject to official doctrinal review under Bylaw 1.9.1.1.
Question 2: Was Lutheran Service Book merely an “official report” per Bylaw 1.9.1.1 or was it subject to
doctrinal review? Since LSB did undergo doctrinal review, please explain why it would not
fall under Bylaw 1.9.1.1 as the President’s Office has done with 100 approved songs for use
in worship?
Opinion: Lutheran Service Book was subject to doctrinal review since it was “material with doctrinal
content issued publically by boards, commissions, or other subordinate groups of the Synod” (Bylaw
1.9.1.1 [a]). See also the response to question 1 above.
106. Michigan District Bylaws Review (09-2557)
When the commission reviewed proposed changes to the Bylaws by the Michigan District during its most
recent meeting, it noted several areas in the existing Bylaws that invited further review. Upon such
review, the commission now offered the following recommendations:
•

Under Article I “Membership and Organization,” Bylaw 1.1 does not clearly reflect that
congregational and church worker memberships are actually held in the Synod and not in
districts, and that membership is received by and through districts, not by the national Synod.

•

Under the same Article I, Bylaw 1.2 fails to include circuits in the organizational structure of the
district, circuits being “component parts” of the Synod created by districts (Synod Bylaw 1.3.2).
The bylaw does mention four levels of organization, but only three are listed.

•

Under Article II, “Regional Assemblies,” Bylaw 3.3, which allows each congregation to be
represented at a Regional Assembly, inaccurately states that the same is true of district
conventions. In the latter case, congregations that are part of a multi-point parish share their vote
at district conventions (Synod Constitution Art. V A).

•

Under Article V, “Elections and Vacancies,” Bylaw 5.7 omits mention of the election of the
district’s member on the Synod’s Committee for Convention Nominations at alternate district
conventions (Synod Bylaw 3.12.3.1).

•

Under the same Article V, Bylaw 5.9 refers to elections “held in Regional Caucus.” The
commission is unaware of any elections taking place on the regional level, which serves as the
primary source for nominations for elections on the district level.
72