# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_June 5 6 1969_S1
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

244. Removal from Office, Faculty: Professor Wilfred Kruse of River Forest had called Kuenne's
attention to the fact that the Board for Higher Education had never carried out the directive of the Detroit
and subsequently the New York convention to draft better procedures governing removal from office of
faculty members. The New York convention had stipulated that the BHE was to consult with both the
President and the Commission on Constitutional Matters. The Commission resolved to have Kuenne write
to President E. Weber, chairman of Committee # 6., giving the details of this matter. The bylaw changes
being proposed by the BHE (Overture 6-43) do not seem to carry out the intentions of the conventions.
Later it was decided to have Kuenne write also to Professor Kruse informing him of this action and to Dr.
Ahlschwede questioning the proposed elimination of 6.81 and 6.83.
245. CTCR Responsibility: Both President Harms and the Commission on Theology and Church
Relations had inquired whether the CTCR is obligated to make still. another recommendation to the
convention regarding the question of fellowship with the ALC. In the previous meeting the CCM had
adopted a ruling. It now formally approved the letters drafted by Kuenne on the basis of this action.
246. Referendum: The Commission had had under advisement for about a year the question whether a
congregational referendum on the ALC question would be constitutional. In view of the fact that many
overtures were now calling for such a referendum some Commission members felt that the Commission
should now on the basis of Bylaw 2.107 b make a ruling on the question. While this was being discussed
a letter arrived from Dr. Lloyd Goetz, chairman of the Committee on Church Relations, asking
specifically for a constitutional ruling on this question. After considerable drafting and re-drafting the
Commission adopted a ruling, attached to the minutes, on the following morning. It was resolved to send
a copy to Dr. Harms as an answer to his earlier request which had been held in abeyance for the time
being, as well as a copy to F. Niedner, chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Matters. The ruling
in effect holds that it would be necessary to amend the Constitution before a congregational referendum
can be held, that such an amendment would introduceytessential change in the polity of the Synod, but
that the Synod is free to introduce such a change if it so desires.
247. Roster Guidelines: A special messenger from Dundee brought a letter from Dr. Wolbrecht
suggesting the inclusion in the Handbook, either by convention action or by decision of the Commission,
of a set of guidelines recently adopted by the Council of Presidents on the maintenance of the clergy
roster. Furthermore, he proposed the inclusion of two additional paragraphs prepared by the Department
of Research and Statistics. In view of the confusion surrounding this entire matter and in the conviction
that since this involves the very important issue of membership in the Synod, the Commission decided to
advise all concerned that these guidelines might be used for a period of about a year on an experimental
basis by the District Presidents and that the Council of Presidents would then be in a position to offer
recommendations to the next convention in sufficient time for these to be printed in the Workbook, so
that the members of the Synod could give careful attention to this question instead of having it presented
to the delegates first upon their arrival at the convention. In the meantime the Commission also decided
to raise the question of guidelines for the teacher roster, to inquire about a possible duplication or conflict
with 3.49, to express a preference for Dr. Wolbrecht's suggested rewording of Reverend Picard's draft,
and to request that our Commission be kept informed of any changes.
248. Board of Appeals Bylaw, 5.65: In view of the change in this bylaw which the Board of Appeals is
proposing in Overture 5-29, the Commission decided to submit an overture recommending that the bylaw
be amended instead by the addition of the following words to the present bylaw: " . . . except when the
constitutionality of the basis or effect of the decision is challenged. In that event the Commission
on Constitutional Matters may on request issue a constitutional opinion. This opinion shall be binding
unless and until it is overruled by a convention (Bylaw 2.107 e). The Board of Appeals shall have the
right to review its decision in the light of the opinion of the Commission on Constitutional Matters and to
modify its decision in order to bring it into conformity with the opinion." The Commission members felt