LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 26–28, 2010, Page 18

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Question 4: Is there a distinction between an overture submitted by a district that seeks to revise or
rescind a resolution of the Synod and an overture that rejects a resolution of the Synod? If
so, what is the distinction?
Opinion: Yes, there is such a distinction. While a district may not reject a resolution of the Synod, it may
always request that the Synod in convention reconsider and review a prior resolution. That right was
reaffirmed by the first “resolved” of 2001 Res. 7-22A: “Resolved, That the Synod assembled in convention affirm the right of a district delegate convention to submit overtures, including recommendations
to reconsider and review doctrinal resolutions of the Synod, and to make other requests to the Synod
assembled in convention.”
Question 5: Would an overture submitted to a convention of the Synod in the form of a resolution
adopted by a convention of a district that rejects a resolution previously adopted by a
convention of the Synod be considered to be “materially in error (Bylaw 3.1.6.2 [c])? Would
such an overture be considered to contain a “misrepresentation of truth”? Shall the President
of the Synod include such a resolution in the Convention Workbook?
Opinion: As discussed above, such a resolution is null and void, and as such it is materially in error under
the terms of Bylaw 3.1.6.2 (c) and should not be published. It would therefore be irrelevant whether any
of the “whereas” or “resolved” paragraphs of the overture contained material representations of truth and
therefore a separate reason to withdraw it from consideration by the convention. Such a district resolution
must not be included in the Convention Workbook and should be “referred by the President of the Synod
to the appropriate district president for action.”
Question 6: May a district of the Synod adopt a resolution that rejects an opinion of the Commission on
Constitutional Matters and/or declares such opinion not of binding force on the congregations and pastors of its district? What would be the effect of such a resolution?
Opinion: While a district may challenge a decision of the CCM and submit an overture seeking to
overrule a decision of the CCM, as provided by Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (c), a decision of the CCM is “binding on
the question unless and until it is overruled by a convention of the Synod.” Such a resolution of a district,
rejecting rather than seeking to have a convention of the Synod overrule a decision of the CCM, is
improper and out of order and therefore null and void.
Question 7: Would such a [district] resolution [that rejects a CCM opinion], if submitted as an overture
to the
Synod in convention, be considered to be “materially in error” or a “misrepresentation of
truth”? Shall the President of the Synod print such a resolution in the Convention Workbook?
Opinion: For the reasons discussed above, such a resolution would also be null and void and, as such, is
materially in error under the terms of Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (c), should not be published in the Convention
Workbook, and should be “referred by the President of the Synod to the appropriate district president for
action” (Bylaw 3.1.6.2 [c]). It would therefore be irrelevant whether any of the “whereas” or “resolved”
paragraphs of the overture would also be considered a material misrepresentation of truth and therefore a
separate reason to withdraw the overture from consideration by the convention.
162. Other Business
A. Report to the Convention
After discussion of a draft provided by Chairman Marcis, it was agreed that the following would constitute the commission’s report to the 2010 convention: