# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_February 1 1985_S5 # Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration) In reference to item 15.1, since the plural, chairmen, is used, it is clear that only the chairman of each board is represented on the church council. With respect to 15.3 of the Guidelines, the Commission is aware of the danger which is involved, but feels that much depends upon the leadership of the congregation, and the rights of the congregation are protected by the right to call a special meeting. In reference to the requirement for doctrinal conformity, the Commission would respectfully call attention to 2.0, 3.0, 5.1, and 8.0 of the Guidelines. It should be noted in this connection that here the congregation sets the standard and the Synod conforms. It is a demonstration of congregational polity. If the congregation has been careful to maintain its own standards, a simple majority would be sufficient to determine whether the Synod conforms to the confessional standard of the congregation. In regard to concerns which are expressed regarding the limitations on holding office, particularly women suffrage and such limitations, the Commission felt that it was best to use the approach of quoting the Synod's position because questions regarding this matter constantly keep arising. While the Commission would prefer brevity, it included this matter in order to forestall any heated discussion and debate on the issue. 103. South Wisconsin District Bylaws (Ag. 1699): Action deferred for consideration at a later meeting. 104. Southern Illinois District Bylaws (Ag. 1723): Attention had been called to a statement in the Bylaws of the Southern Illinois District which limits nominations for the position of district president to pastors who are included on the roster of the Southern Illinois District. The Commission expressed appreciation that this matter was called to its attention and pointed out that it must be corrected in order to agree with Handbook 3.51, a, which limits nominations for district president only to those who are members of the clergy roster of the Synod, without reference to district membership. 105. Wyoming District Bylaws (Ag. 1657, 1662): Action deferred until a later meeting of the Commission. 106. Constitutionality of Action of Ontario District President (Ag. 1711, A): The Rev. H. Preufer had requested a ruling from the Commission on Constitutional Matters regarding procedures followed by the Ontario District President in the colloquization and calling of the Rev. Otto Bischoff to serve Bethel Congregation of Kitchener, Ontario. In response, the Commission pointed out that if the provisions of the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod were violated, the actions of the District President were wrong. The Commission, however, points out that it is not in a position to rule on facts, which facts are in dispute. The matter should therefore be directed to the district Commission on Adjudication. The Commission further wished to point out that Pastor Preufer did not follow proper procedure in addressing the Commission through an attorney. At the very least, his personal signature should have been included. The Commission, however, did not wish to reject the request on the basis of a technicality since the address to the Commission by the attorney was copied to Rev. Preufer. The Commission further pointed out that many factual questions had been raised and that the Commission on Constitutional Matters is not an adjudicative body but rather an interpretative body. The letter of April 27, 1983, from Dr. Sauer to Rev. Preufer spells out the procedure for the calling of Pastor Bischoff, which procedure was followed and is apparently in conflict with the alleged facts contained in the communication from Rev. Preufer's attorney. The Commission suggests that if Rev. Preufer should wish to carry the matter further, he should follow the advice of Dr. Sauer in his letter of April 27, 1983, and present charges relating to it in a proper manner. The adjudicative procedure of the Synod provides for the district Commission on Adjudication to request an opinion of the Commission on Constitutional Matters if, in its view, constitutional matters are involved. The Constitution is clear. If it was or was not followed