LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — October 31–November 1, 2009, Page 4

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Concordia University Ann Arbor provide input regarding the question. The Secretary was also asked
to request the member requesting the interpretation to confirm whether or not he/she had been
appointed to a continuing level faculty position (Bylaw 3.8.3.8.2) and whether or not he/she had been
terminated from that position pursuant to Bylaw 3.8.3.8.7.
124. Interpretation of Constitution Article XIV re Proposing Amendments (09-2566)
In a September 24, 2009 e-mailed letter, the chairman of the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Synod
Structure and Governance, speaking on behalf of the task force, requested an interpretation of the
words “each proposed change shall be voted on separately” in paragraph 2 of Article XIV of the
Constitution of the Synod.
Question:

Since the task force has several constitutional changes which it will be presenting to the
2010 convention, and some of those related, does each change, no matter how small, have
to be presented and voted on separately?

Opinion: Amendments to the Constitution are governed by Article XIV, paragraphs 2 and 3:
2. All proposed changes and amendments must be submitted in writing to the Synod assembled
in convention, and each proposed change shall be voted on separately. A two-thirds majority
of all votes cast shall be necessary for adoption.
3. After adoption by the convention, such amendments shall be submitted to the congregations
of the Synod by means of three announcements in the official periodical within three months
after the close of the convention.
In researching past opinions of the Commission on Constitutional Matters, the commission noted that
the issue raised by this question has never been previously considered. Prior to 1917, the Constitution
of the Synod allowed amendments without reference to the phrase under consideration. Therefore, the
commission has looked at the practice of the Synod since 1917, such practice reflecting the sense and
intent of the Synod since that time.
As recently as the 2004 convention, the Synod considered and acted on two constitutional
amendments. Resolution 7-21 sought to amend a single article of the Constitution, Article XI F 2. The
second, Resolution 5-04A, sought to add directors of family life ministry to the list of those eligible
for membership in the Synod. In doing so, the resolution called for amendments in Articles V, VI, and
XII.
In view of the foregoing, the commission finds that the phrase “each proposed change shall be voted
on separately” may be properly interpreted in at least two ways. First, all changes to a single article
can be submitted as a single change. Because, by reason of the structure of the Constitution, each
article intentionally deals with a single subject, all amendments to a single article may always be
considered a single change.
Second, as with 2004 Res. 5-04A, changes in multiple articles reflecting a single thematic change
may also be considered a single change.
125. Reductions in Force (09-2567)
In an e-mailed letter dated October 19, 2009, a Dispute Resolution Panel submitted the following
request for an opinion.

82