# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_December 13 1985_S3
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

In response to the questions, the Commission reviewed the constitutions of both Trinity, Lexington, and
Good Shepherd, Fremont. In the discussion the members of the Commission noted that by giving the
authority which it has to the Board of Directors, the congregation has effectively disenfranchised itself.
The approach which is presented in the constitutions of both congregations, particularly that of Trinity, is
one of managed administration. The Commission is strongly opposed to this approach and, while it
recognizes the congregations right of self-governance, does not believe it is the proper approach to be
taken. Simply, with regard to the matter of stewardship, it does nothing to inspire congregational
participation. The Commission therefore responds that the Constitution of Trinity, Lexington, as
proposed, appears to be contrary to the basic concept of rights being vested in the congregation. It
believes that the Constitution and Bylaws must clearly set forth those rights which are reserved to the
congregation and those which are delegated. As written, the Board of Directors becomes a small, largely
self-perpetuating group. The Commission further believes that in order for it to deal with all of its
concerns, it would have to rewrite the entire Constitution and Bylaws. If the rights reserved to the
congregation and those rights which are delegated are clearly defined, the Commission will provide a
specific response. It suggests, however, that the congregation come forward with an entirely different
product and that in doing so, it consult the Guidelines for the Constitution of a Congregation provided by
the Commission on Constitutional Matters. During its discussion, the Commission also noted that the
Bylaws do not conform with the resolution of the Synod restricting certain congregational offices to male
members only.
With regard to the Constitution of Good Shepherd, Fremont, the Commission feels that since the call for a
pastor comes from a congregation, the congregation, not the Board of Directors, should act on any
dismissal. It further notes that it is presumptuous to dictate to the District President what he must do,
especially in areas which are covered by Synod's Bylaws.
190. Agency Recognized by the Synod (Ag. 1767): President Cloeter of the Minnesota South District had
requested an opinion of the Commission on Constitutional Matters regarding the definition of "an agency
recognized by the Synod." The question had arisen because of the request of a pastor who serves as
Executive Director of Lutherans for Life to be included on the roster of active pastors in the Synod. At its
1983 convention the Synod had adopted a resolution stating, "Resolved, That The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod commend Lutherans for Life for its clear witness in behalf of sanctity of life, also the
unborn, and that we encourage the members of the Synod to support its efforts."
The Commission stated that although it recognizes the value of Lutherans for Life, commendation and
encouragement is not tantamount to recognition. The Synod commends and encourages the efforts of
many individuals and groups while not officially identifying them as agencies recognized by the Synod.
The Commission believes that in order for a group to hold such status, official action by the Synod or its
Board of Directors is required. The Commission further believes that procedures should be developed so
that pastors or teachers serving such groups as Lutherans for Life may continue to be retained on the
active roster of the Synod's members. It believes, in fact, that such procedures are already in effect in
certain districts.
191. Term of Office -- District Commission on Adjudication (Ag. 1768): President Fink of the Atlantic
District had raised a question with regard to Bylaw 8.15. The question is whether the term of six years
referred to in 8.15, a, applies only to the Commission on Appeals or applies also to district and synodical
Commissions on Adjudication. Bylaw 3.125 allows districts to establish the terms of office of boards and
commissions provided they do not exceed six years. In reviewing the bylaw, the Commission concluded
that since the specific takes precedence over the general, Bylaw 8.15, a, also specifies the term of office
for district Commissions on Adjudication as six years. It noted in its consideration that the plural, "terms,"