# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_December 11 12 1981_S5
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

293. Orientation (Ag. 1559): The Commission agreed to provide for the orientation requested by the
Implementation Committee on the agenda of the next meeting.
294. Must a Congregation Call a Pastor? (Ag. 1561): President Henry Simon of the North Wisconsin
District had forwarded to the Commission a question from Circuit Counselor Richard W. Borchers
whether it was permissible for a congregation to continue "hiring" pastoral services instead of calling a
pastor, and whether such a congregation which persists in this practice should not be excluded from a
convention vote on the basis of Bylaw 4.01 (old numbering)? The Commission resolved upon the
following reply:
1. Congregations which do not formally extend permanent calls cannot be excluded from
membership or from voting privileges merely on that basis.
2. The emphasis in Bylaw 4.01 is on the fact that congregations are to be served only by pastors
who are endorsed by the Synod.
3. Where there seems to be an abuse of the obligation to call a pastor, this is a situation which
requires the counsel of the District President and the Circuit Counselor.
295. Meeting Dates (Ag. 1563): The Commission resolved upon the following meeting dates:
March 5-6, 1982
June 4-5, 1982
September 10-11, 1982
December 10-11, 1982
296. Cabot, Pennsylvania (Ag. 1505, A): Since no further word had been received, it was decided to
remove this item from the agenda with the understanding that it could be restored if necessary.
297. Role of District President in Adjudication Case (Ag. 1564): The Missouri District Commission on
Adjudication had addressed a request both to the CCM and to the synodical Commission on Appeals.
Involved was the following question. When charges have been brought by the elders of a congregation
against a pastor and the matter is finally taken to the District Commission of Adjudication, is the
congregation the complainant? Or does the complainant now become the District President? What
precisely are the roles of all of the persons involved, also with respect to appeals privileges? After
considerable discussion the Commission finally decided to reply along the following lines:
The Commission assumes that proper answers will be forthcoming to the Missouri District
Commission of Adjudication from the synodical Commission on Appeals. If the matter is to be
pursued any further with the Commission on Constitutional Matters, it will be necessary for the
Missouri District Commission to be more precise and to supply a more detailed scenario of the
situation.
298. District Terms of Office (Ag. 1545): This matter had already been included in the guidelines for
District presidents adopted earlier in the meeting.
299. Bohlmann Request Re Faculty Involvement in Election of Seminary President (Ag. 1540, A,B);
Bohlmann Request for Earlier Ruling Regarding Membership on Boards of Regents (Ag. 1546); George
Rummel (Portland Board of Regents) Request for Copy Regarding the Role of Faculty Committees in the