| Who Elects Congregational Lay
Voting Members to Synod Assembly? West Virginia-Western Maryland Synod |
|||||
|
The voting membership of the Synod Assembly includes
clergy and laity. Most of those lay voting members are
elected to that voting membership by their respective
congregations. We call them congregational lay voting
members. This practice can be traced back to 1748
and the first meeting of the first synodical body in
America. We say elected by their respective congregations,
but is this always the case? What's really happening in
our congregations?
Not all of the above are legal (i.e., consistent with the governing documents of our church). Assuming your congregation's constitution does not predate the formation of the ELCA, *C5.04 governs how congregational lay voting members are enfranchised for Synod Assembly. Until 2025, the only legal means for enfranchisement was election by the Congregation Meeting (with some few exceptions). We are not so naïve as to believe that most congregations were actually following their respective constitutions. The list above is not hypothetical; it is anecdotal. It is probably the reality on the ground that compelled the Church Council of the ELCA to recommend in 2025 amendment of *C5.04 to allow the Congregation Council to elect the congregation lay voting members to Synod Assembly. In short, rather than try to get congregations to comply with the constitution as it was written, the Churchwide Assembly 2025 opted for the path of least resistance and amended the Model Constitution for Congregations. Because Churchwide Assembly amended the Model Constitution for Congregations, the guidance previously published by this synod no longer applies in full. We offer this expanded and amended guidance to not only deal with the 2025 changes to *C5.04 but also to include the possibility that your congregation is still working under a pre-2025 constitution. Which version of *C5.04 applies to your congregation
depends upon the date of your last congregational
constitution amendment. *C5.04, as found in two different
iterations of the Model Constitution for Congregations.
Let us compare versions.
The critical difference between the older and amended
versions is in the granting to the Congregation Council
the power to elect Synod Assembly congregational lay
voting members.
Prior to Churchwide Assembly 2025's amendment, congregation
in *C5.04 would have indicated, in most cases, the
Congregation Meeting, as *C5.02 and *C5.03 reserved to the
Congregation Meeting those powers not otherwise delegated
through the congregation's governing documents to the
Congregation Council or others. We may think of this as a
constitutional default setting. Some few
congregations may have adopted local provisions that did
in fact delegate the election of Synod Assembly lay
congregational voting members to their Congregation
Councils, but there is no evidence that a such has been a
wide-spread custom. That your congregation might navigate this process within
the parameters of your congregation's governing documents,
we offer two sections below:
Be sure to compare your constitution's *C5.04 against the
wording of the versions provided above to make sure you
have the right one. |
|||||
For congregations that have not amended their constitutions to conform with the Model Constitution (2025)In light of *C5.02 and *C5.03, which reserve to the
Congregation Meeting those powers not delegated through
the congregation's governing documents to the Congregation
Council or others, the constitutional "default setting" is
election by the Congregation Meeting. Everything in this
section is built on the assumption that your congregation
is not able to immediately amend its constitution. Caveat:
what is written in this section applies only if your
constitution pre-dates the 2025 amendment of *C5.04. In your congregation, who elects voting members to Synod
Assembly?
Tradition is a poor substitute for codification in a congregation's governing documents. Tradition can be quasi-authoritative when governing documents are silent, but when governing documents are explicit, tradition does not take precedence. Since it is simple enough to codify that which is practice, why not codify? Furthermore, why would a congregation not want to follow the non-required provisions of its own constitution when the congregation has the freedom to amend them? If your congregation wants to delegate the prerogative of the Congregation Meeting to elect the congregation's lay voting members to Synod Assembly, you may adopt as either a bylaw or a continuing resolution the following (or something similar): The [Congregation Council][Executive Committee] shall elect this congregation's lay voting members to Synod Assembly.or In the event that the Congregation Meeting fails to elect this congregation's lay voting members to Synod Assembly at its annual meeting, the [Congregation Council][Executive Committee] shall do so. This second example has the benefit of making the
Congregation Meeting the usual elector while providing a
backup in case it fails (e.g., forgets) to do so. For both examples, chose between Congregation Council and Executive Committee; do not use both. Remember to remove the brackets, and codify appropriately. N.B.: when adopting any change to the governing
documents of your congregation, follow the procedure
outlined in your constitution. If creating a provision
delegating authority is urgent, create a continuing
resolution. |
|||||
For congregations that have amended their constitutions to conform with the Model Constitution (2025)Two complications arise from the amended language. First,
the addition of Congregation Council was not
accompanied with a coordinate amendment of congregation
to Congregation Meeting. The older version's use
of congregation allowed, as previously mentioned,
delegation of power in conformity with *C5.03. By
explicitly naming the Congregation Council in the amended
version, congregation may no longer be taken
broadly. The freedom to create a delegating provision
empoweing, e.g., the Executive Committee
evaporates as the juxtaposition with Congregation
Council forces congregation to indicate the
Congregation Meeting, under the 4th principal
of interpretation: "If the bylaws authorize certain things
specifically, other things of the same class are thereby
prohibited" (q.v. RONR (12th
ed.) 56:68). This new rendering, therefore, prohibits the
delegation of this power beyond the Congregation Meeting
and the Congregation Council, and as *C5.05 is a required
provision, not even a local constitutional provision can
delegate. Or also complicates things. In an effort to give
congregations greater freedom—and likely to acknowledge
that many Congregation Councils were already electing the
congregational lay voting members to Synod Assembly (in
contravention of their constitutions)—the use of or appeared
to
be a solution that allowed Congregation Councils to elect
where desired without forcing those congregations happy
(and perhaps insistent upon) the Congregation Meeting
electing to abandon the practice. The presence of or now
forces the question "which?" How does any individual
congregation decide which body (Congregation Meeting or
Congregation Council) will do the actual electing? As much as it is to be preferred that governing documents
clearly delegate authority, the presence of such ambiguity
may often be resolved by an appeal to custom (following
the maxim "consuetudo pro lege servatur"). In other
words, what has your congregation done in the past?
Appealing to custom will prove serviceable so long as
people know the custom. Caveat: the day may come
when people do not know the custom or get locked in a
fight over custom; when this happens, clearly written
rules (e.g., bylaws and continuing resolutions)
will spare the congregation unnecessary conflict (assuming
such rules are consistently followed). The Congregation Meeting is the highest legislative
authority in the congregation. It may codify which body
(Congregation Meeting or Congregation Council) elects,
even abolishing longstanding custom. The Congregation
Council may, in the absence of a determination by the
Congregation Meeting, make its own determination; any such
determination by the Congregation Council may be
overridden by the Congregation Meeting. The following
examples are offered. They may be adopted as bylaws or
continuing resolutions (the later being the faster and
more flexible option). Select the one that best works for
your congregation (modifying as seems prudent).
|
|||||
|
West Virginia-Western Maryland Synod ℅St. Paul Lutheran Church, 309 Baldwin Street, Morgantown, WV 26505 304-363-4030 + Porter@WV-WMD.org |