# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_June 30 2005_S4 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) Opinion: The answer to this question is “no.” Bylaw 1.10.2 defines the parties to which it applies as “(1) members of the Synod, (2) the Synod itself, (3) a district or an organization owned and controlled by the Synod, (4) persons involved in excommunication, or (5) lay members of congregations of the Synod holding positions with the Synod itself or with districts or other organizations owned and controlled by the Synod.” The current bylaw derives from the prior dispute resolution process, previously found in Chapter VIII of the 2001 Handbook and Bylaw 1.10.2 specifically from former Bylaw 8.01. Only when both participants in a dispute are members of one of the identified classes does the bylaw apply. Question 2: Does the language of Bylaw 1.10.2 require that both parties to a dispute be individuals defined in (1) through (5)? Opinion: The answer to this question is “yes” for the reasons set forth above. Question 3: Are laypersons that have been elected by a district convention to serve on the nominating committee required by Bylaw 4.7.2 “holding positions with the Synod itself or with districts” under the terms of Synod Bylaw 1.10.2 (5)? Opinion: The answer to this question is “yes.” To the extent that the issue in dispute relates to the layperson’s role as an elected representative of the district, the person is within the list of parties identified in the fifth category, “(5) lay members of congregations of the Synod holding positions with the Synod itself or with districts or other organizations owned and controlled by the Synod.” 67. Call of Non-Rostered Commissioned Ministers (05-2428) In a June 20, 2005 letter, a district president asked questions regarding the extending of calls to nonrostered teachers, questions raised by a particular situation in a congregation of his district. He explained that the teachers in question have been trained and certified by the Synod but have chosen not to be rostered. He added that the involved congregation understands that these teachers would have no protection under the Constitution of the Synod and are employees for whom the congregation must assume its share of the cost of Social Security and Medicare. Question 1: May a member congregation of the Synod under its right of self-government (Constitution VII 1 and Bylaw 1.10.9) extend a call to a teacher in its school who is not on the roster of the Synod? Opinion: The term “call” has a variety of usages in the Synod. Even volunteer workers (e.g., Sunday school teachers) and paid staff (e.g., organists) are at times referred to by congregations as “called.” In its 1981 convention Res. 6-14 the Synod defined its own usage of the term “call,” referring to it as a “solemn call” and adopting the following definition for its use in its placement procedures for teacher candidates: A solemn call is an official request, offer, or agreement extended by a calling body in the name of the triune God to a person eligible to receive such a call into an educational ministry of the LCMS. Offers extended to such eligible persons but erroneously referred to as “appointments” or “contracts” are also to be considered calls. A call may be for a limited period of time (nontenured) or unlimited (tenured). A solemn call is also referred to as a divine call. Official synodical call documents are available from most district offices and Concordia Publishing House. Do not use locally designed documents. Calls may be changed or terminated for valid reasons. 30