# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_February 8 9 1974_S3
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

the effect that a District convention should realign circuits or at least specifically authorize the Board of
Directors to take certain actions in connection with such realignment. He had also stated that if it was
impossible for the regular procedures to be followed in the nomination and election of counselors to
new counselor positions, the District President could appoint someone to fill a vacancy. The
Commission ratified his letter.
15. Nomination of Counselors (Ag. 505): Secretary W.H. Niermann of the Iowa East District had raised
the familiar question about obtaining a majority in the procedure for nominating counselors. The
Secretary had given the familiar answer that what was intended here was the support on the part of the
majority of the congregations participating in the nominating procedure. The Commission formally
ratified his reply.
16. Majority Nominating for Counselor (Ag. 523): The Commission authorized the Secretary to reply
along the same lines to Secretary Meschke of the Nebraska District whose letter asking the same
question arrived on the day of the meeting.
17. Circuit Conference Overtures (Ag. 510): Rev. R.A. Giese of Aberdeen, South Dakota had asked
whether circuit conferences may submit overtures to a District convention. Chairman Luessenhop had
replied that since they were not permitted to do so with respect to the conventions of the Synod the
same applied also to District conventions. The Commission ratified his reply.
18. Emeritus as Circuit Counselor (Ag. 517): Secretary Arthur Strege of the Missouri District had asked
whether an emeritus who is on pension and on social security but who is called full-time as the pastor of
a voting congregation can be a circuit counselor. The Commission decided to reply: If the man is under
contract to the congregation he is not eligible to be a counselor; however, if he has a call to the
congregation he may serve as counselor. It was suggested, however, that the District secretary inquire
closely as to his standing and to recommend that his eligibility for Concordia Plans, if he is not yet 72,
should be investigated closely by the pastor and congregation involved.
19. Proposal Re Seminary Problem (Ag. 520): The Secretary asked the Commission for reaction to a
plan designed to alleviate the seminary problem, a*plan calling essentially for the Board of Control to
invite the Board for Higher Education to participate with it in the governance of the seminary, for the
appointment of the executive secretary of the BHE as the administrative officer of the seminary during
the interim, and for a procedure on the part of the Board of Control to permit each individual instructor
to either be charged or cleared under Res. 3-09. Considerable attention was given to these proposals.
20. Preus Letter (Ag. 522): Under date of February 6 Dr. Preus had submitted to the Commission a
detailed letter with nine specific requests for rulings or opinions. These together with the Commission's
replies are listed in the paragraphs immediately following.
21. Interpretation of Res. 3-09 (Ag. 522): Dr. Preus had asked: "1. Does Res. 3-09 of the New Orleans
convention condemn the doctrinal position of the faculty as a whole and/or of each individual faculty
member? Or does it permit each individual faculty member to state that the position rejected in
Resolution 3-09 is not his personal position, and therefore Resolution 3-09 does not apply to him? Or
does it merely reject certain theological positions?" The Commission adopted the following opinion:
1. Resolution 3-09 does not condemn the doctrinal position of the faculty as a whole and/or of
each individual faculty member, but it does condemn the position defined as the stance of "the
faculty majority."