# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_October 16 17 1967_S5
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

clarification of the character of the Board for Convention Nominations. Is this board or committee an ad
hoc committee? Does the Handbook paragraph 2.15 concerning holding more than one office apply to the
elected members of the Board for Convention Nominations?" After detailed discussion the Commission
drafted and formally adopted the following opinion: "The Commission on Constitutional. Matters has
heretofore held and hereby reaffirms its earlier opinion that the Board for Convention Nominations is an
ad hoc convention committee (see especially 2.139 "for the next convention"). It is our opinion, therefore,
that the prohibition against holding multiple offices (paragraphs 2.15 and 3.35, Handbook, 1967 edition)
does not apply to the Board for Convention Nominations." It was decided to send a copy of this opinion
also to President Phil Fiess who had expressed concern, and also a copy to President Harms together with
a letter informing him that it is the intention of the Commission to propose further clarification of the
Handbook on this matter to the Denver convention.
38. Handbook Rearrangement: The Commission considered Dr. Wolbrecht's suggestions for a
rearrangement of Handbook materials. It was decided to give further study to these suggestions before
the Denver convention to determine whether any recommendations along these lines should be made to
the convention.
39. Handbook Decisions: It was decided to make the Handbook one-half inch wider; to authorize the
Secretary to again use pictures and to finalize the cover, with a preference for one similar to the present
cover and with the year added to the spine; to have members of the Commission check in detail those
sections of the galley proofs on which they had done manuscript checking.
40. Elective Office: Dr. Wolbrecht had raised the question as to the interpretation of this term. The
Commission will give this further study. One suggestion made by a member: "An office is not to be
regarded as an elective office unless a synodical or District convention is involved in the election."
41. Department of Research and Statistics, Para. 2.99: Dr. Wolbrecht had suggested updating this section.
It was resolved to recommend to him that he address a memorial to the convention with respect to any
changes he considers necessary or advisable.
42. Division Chairmen: Vice President Wittmer had inquired whether the chairmen of the Division of
Church Government and of the Division of Doctrine and Church Relations, who are listed in 2.173, could
not be included among the Council of Administrators in 2.175. The Commission decided that it had no
right to make the suggested addition to 2.175 because apparently the intention had been that these two
chairmen were not to be regarded as members of the Council of Administrators.
43. Right to Object: Dr. Wolbrecht had inquired who is meant in the statement of 1.27 e: "Every member
of the Synod shall have the right to object to any appointment made to such committees." Is this any
member of the Synod or merely any delegate? Jersild, who had served on the drafting committee, pointed
out that the intention very firmly had been: every member of the Synod. It was resolved, however, to
inform Dr. Wolbrecht that the Commission will give further study to this question and will probably
propose some clarification to the Denver convention.
44. Texas District Handbook: It was decided that the members should send their criticisms to Kuenne
who will correlate and reply.
45. Unalterable Articles: Attorney Dusenberg of St. Louis had written to Kuenne objecting to the concept
of unalterable articles in the guidelines for congregational constitutions. It was decided to have Kuenne
write expressing appreciation of the letter and informing Mr. Dusenberg that in due course of time a
revision of the guidelines will be considered.