LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — August 10–12, 2012, Page 8

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

The commission would note that the concept of a synod, of which the district is a part, involves that of walking
together. This is reflected in Bylaw 2.39 b [2010 Bylaw 1.7.2], which states:
The Synod expects every member congregation to respect its resolutions and to consider them of binding
force if they are in accordance with the Word of God and if they appear applicable as far as the condition of
the congregation is concerned. The Synod, being an advisory body, recognizes the right of the congregation
to be the judge of the applicability of the resolution to its local condition. However, in exercising such
judgment, a congregation must not act arbitrarily but in accordance with the principles of Christian love
and charity.
In view of this, the district, which is a part of the Synod, can rightly expect its congregations to conform to the
Bylaws of the district unless a requirement does not “appear applicable as far as the condition of the
congregation is concerned.” The congregation which does not pay its assessment can rightly be expected to
demonstrate that its local condition makes the assessment requirement inapplicable for them. It would seem that
congregations not paying the assessment for convention expenses should be dealt with evangelically with the
understanding that ultimately its continued membership in the Synod through the district might be involved.

At its November 1994 meeting, the commission responded to a similar question from a pastor whose
congregation was refusing to pay because of “extreme financial hardship.” The commission responded by
quoting from its 1992 opinion, as quoted above. The same response also answers the current question,
also in the negative: delegate attendance at a district convention cannot be contingent upon payment of a
registration fee.
Question 3: If the answers to the preceding questions are in the negative, what recourse does a
congregation or its voting delegates have if they have been improperly denied the
opportunity to attend and vote at the convention?
Opinion: The Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod provide no recourse following the convention,
should a congregation be denied voting delegate representation. The time for contesting seating would
have been at the time of the convention and according to rules established for that purpose.
Question 4: Also, if a congregation has been denied the right to send delegates to the district convention,
what recourse does that congregation have regarding the election for President of the Synod?
Are they to be denied the right to vote for president because they have been unjustly barred
from attendance at a district convention?
Opinion: As is the case with all congregations of the Synod whose voting delegates are prevented from
attending their district conventions for any reason, the Bylaws of the Synod provide no recourse that
would allow participation in the presidential election. Bylaw 3.12.2.3 clearly reserves that right to the
voting delegates who were in attendance at the prior year’s district convention.
Question 5: But if the convention was not convoked (that is, called together) according to the
Constitution, would the convention be a legal convention, capable of transacting business?
Opinion: As the previous questions indicate the questioner’s concern is for district conventions, the
commission responds to this question about “the convention” in regard to district conventions.
Article XII 14 of the Constitution states: “For the legal holding of the sessions of the districts, a
constitutional convocation of such sessions and the presence of at least one-third of the voting members
represented by at least one of their respective representatives (pastor or lay delegate) are required.”
297