# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_March 5 1982_S1
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

2. Community Counseling Services/Richard Engdahl Report (Ag. 1583): Dr. Bohlmann had asked the
Commission to react to this report. After discussing the matter for some time the Commission invited Mr.
Richard Engdahl to appear for further discussion of the matter. The Commission decided upon the
following outline of a reply to Dr. Ralph Bohlmann:
1. The material was handed to the members of the Commission at the beginning of its meeting.
Therefore, there had not been sufficient time to study the material in any detail.
2. However, the discussion did surface two concerns:
a. Convention Resolution 12-08A had stated that the "approval of the Presidents of the
Districts involved" had to be secured. This provision does not seem to surface in the
Report. Does this mean that the voluntary nature of District participation has been set
aside?
b. There is the possibility that constitutional questions may. be raised in the future, and
therefore the Commission cannot commit itself fully at this time.
3. Nevertheless, it was agreed that the process should continue and that the proposal should be
shared with the field. As questions arise, the Commission will deal with them.
The Commission was gratified that Mr. Richard Engdahl agreed with this approach to the matter and
understood the limitations under which the Commission labored in giving any reply at this time which
would be more substantive.
3. Atonement-Florissant (Ag. 1509, A-G) : The further correspondence in this case was shared with the
Commission. It was generally agreed that once the seal of silence has been broken the right to defend
must be maintained; otherwise there would be a miscarriage of justice. Since misconceptions have been
placed in the mind of the reading public thru publication in Lutheran Perspective, greater harm could
result from silence than from speaking out in behalf of the greater public good. This is the position which
the Commission took in case anyone should question the right of the Commission to have published its
opinion regarding the procedure of the English District Commission of Adjudication in this case.
4. Elections: It was agreed to hold off the elections to organize the Commission until the June meeting
when it was hoped all members could be present.
5. Meeting Dates : The Commission did make the following changes in meeting dates:
The December, 1982 meeting was changed to January 7-8, 1983.
The September meeting was changed to October 1-2, 1982.
6. Executive Secretary Position, Board for Parish Services (Ag. 1578): The Board for Parish Services
intends to call for nominees for its Executive Secretary position on the assumption that the board is a new
board and therefore entitled to fill its chief executive position as a new position. The Implementation
Committee had ruled that all contracts would be in force for the duration and when the contracts expired
the respective Executive Secretaries would go under the provision of the new Bylaws that they serve "at
the pleasure of the board." The Board for Parish Services contends that it is not an old, continuing board
but a new board. Dr. Bohlmann questioned this position and by letter asked the Commission to rule on the
matter.
Specifically he asked: