# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_March 27 1993_S5
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

Reinstatement requires an approval by 75 percent of. the members of the Council of Presidents present and
voting whereas extension of candidate status requires only a majority vote. It was the desire of Rev.
Jungkuntz that if the Commission should find that he had been improperly removed that he have his
candidate status restored and work through the process of being reinstated by the Council of Presidents.
After reviewing the material which was available and the issues involved, the Commission decided to
respond as follows:
In our letter of May 14, 1992, the Commission ruled that the 1986 amendment to Bylaw 2.19 could not be
applied retroactively to reduce Dr. Theodore Jungkuntz' candidate status from three years to two years. It
follows that an application for extension of his candidacy within the initial three-year period would be
timely and he would be entitled to have that application considered on its merits. This appears to be the
only question of interpretation presented to the CCM in any of the materials.
It is beyond the jurisdiction of the CCM, however, to determine whether Dr. Jungkuntz was or was not
"improperly removed" as the CCM is not an adjudicatory body; that is, that it does not find facts or
adjudicate the rights of individuals. Thus, the question of improper removal would seem, in the first
instance, a matter for reconsideration by the district president and the Council of the Presidents, or,
ultimately, to be presented for dispute resolution under Chapter VIII of the Bylaws.
It is important to note also that nothing herein concerns the separate issue of whether or not Dr. Jungkuntz
ought to be reinstated.
28. Call--Seminary President (Ag. 1952) : A letter from Dr. Carl Driessnack indicated that it was his
belief that Dr. David Schmiel did not have a call to the presidency of the Ft. Wayne seminary, but rather an
appointment. Further, the question was raised as to whether Dr. Schmiel had a call as a professor. Dr.
Driessnack stated that in his opinion it is irresponsible to say that Dr. Schmiel has a call and requested that
this matter be checked with both the Commission on Constitutional Matters and the Commission on
Theology and Church Relations. The original letter which was addressed to Rev. David Mahsman, editor of
the Lutheran Witness Reporter, with copies to the Secretary of the Commission on Constitutional Matters
and Dr. Samuel Nafzger, executive director of the Commission on Theology and Church Relations had been
shared with the Commission on Constitutional Matters.

When forwarding this item to members of the Commission on Constitutional Matters, the Secretary had
pointed out that executives of boards or staff who are commissioned or ordained ministers of religion are to
receive calls on the basis of Bylaw 3.950, even though in many cases these persons serve at the pleasure of
the board. On this basis, as a chief executive officer of the Board of Regents of a seminary, the President of
the seminary who is an ordained minister should receive a call even though he is serving a five-year
renewable term.
In the discussion which took place, the Commission concluded that it was not necessary to refer to those
items listed under Bylaw 3.950 and to the seminary president as chief executive officer of the Board of
Regents of the seminary but rather merely to refer to the bylaws which relate to the matter of the president
of the one of the educational institutions of the Synod as dealt with under Bylaw 6.11 election (of
presidents). The Commission therefore decided to respond as follows to the questions which had been
received:
Procedures involved in the election of presidents of the educational institutions of the Synod are found in
Bylaw 6.11 of the Handbook. The question which has been raised with regard to the issue of whether Dr.
Schmiel has received a call to serve as President of Concordia Theological Seminary, Ft. Wayne, would