To Appoint Task Force to Evaluate Current Electoral Circuit Parameters

first essential component was that the Synod consisted of equal (Pfarrgemeinde) (pastor-congregation), no matter their numerical size, and it was these Pfarrgemeinde (pastor- congregations) that held the franchise. The second essential component was the maintaining of a “balance of power” in the conventions of the Synod between the clergy and the laity. To accomplish this principle of franchise, the 1847 Constitution of the Synod assigned the franchise to each member Pfarrgemeinde of the Synod, with each Pfarrgemeinde to receive two votes, one to be cast by its pastor and the other, by the lay delegate accredited by the congregation. The German term used was Pfarrgemeinde, and it was defined in a footnote to the 1847 Constitution as “either one single congregation or the sum of the individual congregations which the pastor serves (bedient), as, in Germany, the territory in which he serves is called Kirchspiel or Kirchensprengel. The pastor may serve 3 or 4 or more congregations, locally separated; they are in relation to him essentially only one congregation.” In 1924, when the Constitution was translated into English from German, the term “parish” was used in reference to situations in which a pastor served more than one individual congregation and the term “congregation” was used to reference situations in which a pastor served only one congregation. Thus, each congregation or parish (in this specific limited sense) was entitled to two votes, one by its pastor, and the other by its accredited lay delegate. Today the term “parish” has been replaced with “multi-congregation parish” (Constitution Article XII 10 a).

A. The Historic Practice of Franchise at the Conventions of the Synod At the time of its inception every congregation or parish was entitled to send its pastor and a lay delegate to the conventions of the Synod. When the Synod divided into districts this did not change. Each congregation or parish sent two delegates to both the conventions of the Synod and the district. The entire Synod would meet in convention every three years and the districts would meet in convention annually. Originally conventions were held in one of the congregations of the Synod. As a result of the growth of the Synod, it was becoming difficult to find host congregations large enough to provide the necessary housing for all the delegates. Therefore, it was proposed to the 1864 convention to begin to hold delegate conventions. However, the congregations in Fort Wayne, Ind. and St. Louis, Mo. assured the convention that they would have no problem serving as hosts, so no changes were adopted (1864 Proceedings, 3). However, by 1869 this assurance proved to be unrealistic, and C.F.W. Walther suggested establishing delegate conventions. Professor George Schick was given the responsibility to develop a plan. This tentative plan was for two or more congregations to select one pastor and one lay delegate. When the plan was adopted in 1872 it was specified that the pastor and lay delegate should be selected from between two to seven congregations (1872 Proceedings, 96–97). Presumably, small congregations would form large groupings and large congregations would form small groupings. While the convention was originally scheduled for 1875, the first delegate convention was convened a year earlier in 1874. The suggestion for a delegate convention, proposed in 1869, was actually the second grouping of congregations within the Synod. Prior to this formation of electoral circuits, visitation circuits had been established by the Synod at its 1866 convention. While the two existed side by side, they were created for completely different purposes. Electoral circuits functioned only for the purpose of selecting delegates to conventions of the Synod. However, the concept behind the establishment of visitation circuits was to address a concern considered crucial from the very beginning of the Synod, which was to ensure and retain the unity of doctrine and commitment to the Scriptures and Lutheran Confessions within the Synod. At the founding of the Synod in 1847, the responsibility for visitation to ensure unity and faithfulness to the Scriptures and Lutheran Confessions was assigned to the President of the Synod. When the Synod divided into districts in 1854, one of the major concerns was maintaining this unity within the Synod, and it was resolved by giving the responsibility of visitation not only to the president of each district of the Synod but also to the President of the Synod as well. However, with the rapid growth of the number of congregations in the Synod, it became impossible for the President of the Synod to carry out this duty of visitation. Therefore, the 1864 convention removed the duties of visitation from the general President and essentially entrusted all duties of visitation of the congregations and individual members of the Synod to the district president. The one exception specified was that if the President of the Synod was convinced that a district president had erred in his dealing with a congregation or individual member, the President of the Synod himself was authorized to investigate personally (1864 Proceedings, 4; 1873 Handbook, 89). Again, due to the growth of the Synod, these visitation responsibilities quickly proved to be too great for a district president alone to carry out. Therefore, the 1866 convention adopted a resolution establishing visitation circuits of two to seven congregations in order to help the district presidents carry out their visitation responsibilities (1866 Proceedings, 85). When the decision to have delegate conventions was adopted at the 1872 convention, while the guidelines were also set at two to seven congregations being given one pastor and one lay delegate, which was the same numbers as used for visitation circuits, there does not seem to have been any effort to have these two types of circuits coincide, or even an indication that they should. In both cases, districts were free to group them as they pleased. In the ensuing years a significant variation in the size of electoral circuits developed among the various districts, with many districts having electoral circuits of two or three congregations. In an effort to reduce the number of delegates at Synod conventions, the 1893 Synod convention adopted a resolution calling for circuits to number between five to seven congregations (1893 Proceedings, 125). However, there was no change in Article III “Membership” as the 1899 edition of the Synodical Handbook does not reflect this continuing to read: “The power of this corporation shall be lodged with the accredited clerical and lay delegates of the congregations in actual membership with this synod. Not less than two and not more than seven congregations being entitled to one clerical and one lay representative in this organization at the option of said congregations, and only such delegates shall be entitled to a vote at the meetings of this Synod” (1899 Handbook, 54). Synod President Dr. Ludwig Fuerbringer reported to the 1908 convention of the Synod that 77 of the 245 electoral circuits did not conform to this rule adopted by the 1899 convention, and he recommended enlarging electoral circuits to at least ten congregations. However, no action was taken until the 1917 convention, which would then become effective with the 1920 convention. This convention also adopted a resolution indicating that visitation and electoral circuits should coincide as much as possible (1917 Proceedings, 108–9). The following resolution is noteworthy as it explains the reasoning for the change. Reducing Number of Delegates On the past scale of representation in the Delegate Convention, Synod has become too large a body, both for effective dispatch of business and even more so with respect to the quartering of delegates. After considering various propositions, Synod

Resolved, 1. That henceforth from five to ten congregations shall combine to form an electoral circuit, with the understanding that the relative size of congregations shall determine how many shall constitute a circuit, provided, however, that no circuit comprise less than five nor more than ten congregations; each circuit, as heretofore, to be represented by a clerical and a lay delegate. … (1917 Proceedings, English, 52) These parameters remained in effect until the 1944 convention when a change was made, again prompted by the perception that the conventions were becoming too large. Note the reasons specified in the resolution adopted: ACTION The following submitted by Committee 6 were adopted:

WHEREAS, The number of delegates to synodical conventions is steadily growing larger; and

WHEREAS, This causes great difficulty in providing proper housing; and

WHEREAS, An equal reduction of delegates will not infringe upon the representation rights of any congregation; therefore be it

Resolved, That Art. IV, A, page 19 of the Synodical Handbook be revised to read: “Every ten to fifteen member congregations shall form an electoral circuit, which shall elect one pastor and one layman and their alternates to represent them at the conventions of Synod”; … (1944 Proceedings, 207) The Synodical Survey Commission Report, written by Dr. August Suelflow in 1959, indicated that in nine of the districts, the electoral and visitation circuits were usually identical. The other two thirds of the districts used a system which treated the two types of circuits independently in one degree or another. The report concluded that it is legitimate to question the degree to which the districts followed the encouragement of the 1917 resolution. Note the following from the 1960 Handbook, which sets the parameters, but makes no specific connection between electoral and visitation circuits: 1.51 Electoral Circuits of Member Congregations An electoral circuit shall comprise from 10 to 15 member congregations. Each electoral circuit shall be represented by one pastor and one layman. Large congregations shall form small circuits, and small congregations shall form large circuits. A fractional portion remaining after the circuits have been formed shall be entitled to the same representation as a complete circuit (1960 Handbook). The 1967 convention proposed a manner of electing delegates to conventions in a way which would ensure that there was some kind of an ongoing relationship between the congregations involved in the electoral circuits. It did this by both changing the parameters of an electoral circuit and tying visitation circuits to electoral circuits. It also proposed a means by which an electoral circuit, which did not meet the parameters, could request an exemption from the Office of the President. Note the following sections from the overture proposed in the 1967 Workbook (pp. 124–25): To Revise Handbook Regulations Regarding Convention Delegates Considerable confusion and dissatisfaction exist with reference to the election of delegates to the convention of the Synod and their accountability. For example:

1. Electoral Circuits (1.51). These have often been artificially created entities, with little cohesiveness, hindering effective postconvention action in implementing and even in transmitting information. We propose that representation be on the basis of the regular, permanent visitation circuits.

2. Number of Congregations (1.51). Present requirement: from 10 to 15 member congregations shall form an electoral circuit. Some visitation circuits have fewer than 10 congregations. If two visitation circuits are combined (we are proposing that provision be made for that possibility), the electoral circuit may well number more than 15 congregations. Furthermore, many have felt that representation should be based not on the number of congregations but on the number of communicant members involved. We propose a method based on both number of congregations and number of communicants, with a wide enough spread between minimum and maximum requirements in each category to take care of most situations and with a prescribed procedure which permits the President of the Synod to deal with those cases which still prove to be exceptional. …

4. Functions of the Delegate. What does the delegate do? Presumably he attends the convention, studies, listens, dialogs, makes judgments, votes. And then, according to the present paragraph 1.55, he reports to the circuit the action of the Synod. And this is all? This delegate has just had the experience of a lifetime. He has been caught up in a great cause. He has gained fresh insights. He has grown tremendously in the faith. A fresh love for his Synod and for his Savior lives in his heart. And then he goes home. To what? We are of the opinion that the Synod should dignify this position and therefore recommend that the delegate be elected for a 2-year term, to serve until the next convention of the Synod. What a source of power this man can be for the mission of the church!

PROPOSED WORDING 1.51 Voting Delegates Voting delegates shall consist of one pastor and one layman from each electoral circuit. An electoral circuit shall consist either of one or of two adjacent visitation circuits, as shall be determined by each district, on the basis of the following requirements: each pair of delegates shall represent from 7 to 20 member congregations, involving an aggregate communicant membership ranging from 1,500 to 10,000. Exceptions to these requirements and limitations can be made only by the President of the Synod upon the request of a district board of directors. Voting delegates shall serve a 2-year term, beginning with the convention; after the convention they shall function as resource persons in their circuit and assist in the dissemination and implementation of the synodical resolutions in their area. … The convention adopted the proposed wording for electoral circuits (1967 Proceedings, 121–22). The 2019 Handbook retains essentially the same wording with a slight change in structure and wording (Bylaw 3.1.2 [a–d]).

B. Current Trends Due to demographic changes over the past several convention cycles, it has become necessary for more and more visitation circuits either to request an exemption from the President of the Synod or to be combined in order to qualify to meet the parameters for an electoral circuit. The result has been a gradual decrease in the number of electoral circuits within the Synod and the number of delegates attending conventions. The following table is compiled on the basis of the Proceedings from the various convention years and The Lutheran Annual. (Note the figures for 1967, 1969, and 1986 included the three Canadian districts and the Argentina/Brazil District*, which have since formed their own church body.) The 1967 convention was held prior to the adoption of the current parameters. The percentage in parenthesis for 1986, 2007, 2016, and 2019 states the percentage of visitation circuits which were also electoral circuits. The number of exemptions is unknown. Year Electoral Circuits Delegates Visitation Circuits Congregations 1967 424 (441)* 882 ? 5,904 1969 478 (503)* 1,006 ? 5,765 1986 558 (580)* (89%) 1,160 624 5,933 (6,150)* 2007 639 (99%) 1,278 643 6,168 2016 568 (89%) 1,136 633 5,968 2019 551 (86%) 1,102 636 5,875 2023 532 (87%) 1,049 608 5,777 The current estimate for the 2023 convention is that approximately 20 percent of the visitation circuits currently do not qualify as electoral circuits, which would be about 125 of the 625 visitation circuits. This in turn would mean that if no exemptions to the parameters were granted by the President of the Synod, there would be about 500 electoral circuits sending delegates to the 2023 Synod convention and about 1,000 voting delegates. What is unknown in the above table is the number of exceptions granted for each convention to visitation circuits that did not qualify as an electoral circuit and the number of visitation circuits that were joined together to form an electoral circuit. These numbers indicate that a growing number of visitation circuits, because of demographic reasons, no longer qualify as electoral circuits. In addition, the current Bylaws provide no guidelines to the President of the Synod for determining whether or not to grant an exception, or the basis on which exemptions are to be considered. This ambiguity could result in questions being raised regarding why one visitation circuit is granted an exception while another is not. Another complicating factor involving circuits and voting, not covered by the Bylaws, is the fact that there are currently 13 multi- congregation parishes which cross district lines, as well as an additional 50 multi-congregation parishes within districts which are in different visitation circuits. This generates confusion in these situations regarding voting for a circuit visitor, eligibility to represent an electoral circuit, and voting at district conventions. All of this points to the advisability for the Synod, due to demographic changes, to again consider the parameters for the electoral circuits which select delegates to conventions of the Synod to determine if they are adequate as they are or should be changed. In addition, it would be helpful for the Synod to clarify some of the ambiguity in the Bylaws regarding multi-congregation parishes which cross district or circuit lines. Therefore be it

Resolved, That the Synod in convention establish a task force to consider the parameters for visitation circuits and electoral circuits and report with an overture six months before the 2026 Synod convention; and be it further

Resolved, That the task force consist of the Secretary of Synod, the Commission on Constitutional Matters, the Commission on Handbook, and three district presidents and three district secretaries (from different districts) chosen by the Council of Presidents