# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_July 6 13 1989_S8
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

1. The Commission finds your first question to be somewhat puzzling. It is obvious from page
14 of Dr. Werning's letter to the Board of Regents of his intention to bring "formal charges"
against you, although it is not possible from the information provided to discern precisely
what those charges were or the relief sought. If by the term "adjudication" you mean a
controversy cognizable by the Bylaws of the Synod, it would seem, nevertheless, that such a
controversy was initiated because it appears that the faculty, the President of the institution,
and the Board of Regents all acted upon it in some way. We would note, parenthetically, in
this regard that we have not been provided with either Dr. Preus' charge to the faculty
committee (referred to in the faculty committee report) or Dr. Preus' memo to the Board of
Regents referred to in the Board minutes.
2. As to your second question, the Commission is likewise unable to state whether "the matter"
is closed. The answer to that question, again, would depend upon the nature of the charges,
the relief sought, whether the relevant procedures prescribed by the Bylaws were observed,
and whether any mechanism for further review is available (see e.g. Bylaws 6.41-6.51). The
Commission would further point out that the second question, as submitted, does not present
a question of the interpretation of Synod's Constitution, Bylaws or resolutions, and is
therefore not properly before us.
158. Institutional President's Retirement (Ag. 1865) : Mr. Melvin Bredemeier, a member of the Board
of Regents of Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne, had requested a ruling from the Commission
on Constitutional Matters regarding the following items relative to Bylaw 6.53 of the Handbook:
a. In regard to the removal of an incumbent from the office of president (and as a member of a
faculty pursuant to Bylaw 6.43 c), can an individual be "honorably retired" against his will?
i.e. If a proposed retirement is not voluntary by the incumbent, is it a requirement that charges
be brought and corresponding procedures followed to effect an involuntary retirement?
b. In the event an individual is declared honorably retired by the Board of Regents even though
this action is against the will of the retiree, what are the options of the individual retired and
the corresponding authority of the Board?
c. Is Chapter VIII.B.1.c. of the CTS-FW Board of Regents Handbook in conflict with the
synodical 1986 Handbook Bylaw 6.538? i.e. Whereas, The synodical 1986 Handbook is
silent as to the method and authorization of a Board of Regents in exercising its functions to
honorably retire a president, is not the Board of Regents authorized to pursue its own
supervisory authority under its Board of Regents Handbook?
In response to these questions, the Commission decided to respond as follows:
Certain questions have been posed to the CCM basically regarding the authority of the Board of
Regents of Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne to terminate its current president by
honorable retirement
The synodical Handbook is silent.
The language specifically referring to the honorable retirement of a seminary president was
removed from the 1986 Handbook in response to resolutions adopted by the 186 synodical
convention as proposed by the President's Commission on Synodical Higher Education.
Specifically, these Bylaws are found in the relevant Bylaw 6.03, which expands and details the