# LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters Minutes_St. Louis Missouri_December 16 1999_S9
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

The frequency of the meetings shall be specified.
Example:
The voters assembly shall meet ...
19.0 RULES OF ORDER
This should be provided for so that everything is done "decently and in order."
Example:
In addition to principles laid down in Scripture, the latest edition of Robert's Rules of Order shall be
followed.
20.0 AMENDMENTS
Again, provision should be made for amending the bylaws.
Example:
These bylaws may be amended in properly convened meeting of the voters assembly by a majority of all
voting members present, provided the proposed change has been announced in a previous meeting or has
been submitted in writing at least two weeks prior to the meeting to all voting communicant members.
3. ALTERNATIVES
Since the Scriptures prescribe no particular form of polity for a church body or for a local
congregation, a great deal of freedom must be recognized. Congregations are quite free to structure
themselves in such a way as to carry out the Great Commission of our Lord most effectively.
Alternate forms of organization have been proposed by various individuals and groups. These may
well be reviewed and applied after careful scrutiny in the light of these Guidelines.
Much depends on the size of the congregation, the ethnic mix of the membership, the sociological
nature-- whether rural, urban, or suburban-- and other pertinent factors.
Even in those instances in which congregations wish to develop a type of organization different from
that which is presumed in the foregoing constitution and bylaw proposals, the basic principles enunciated
in the previous chapters should still be maintained.
84. Missouri District Bylaws Revision (99-2159)
The revisions to the Bylaws of the Missouri District were approved in their final form. The Secretary will
inform the District accordingly, offering a final suggestion that the omission of specific synodical bylaw
references may be well advised given the restructuring of the synodical Handbook that is presently
underway.
85. Questions Re Interaction between Bylaws 2.27 and 6.47 when Charges are Brought against a
Member of a Faculty (99-2164)
The Chairman of. the Board of Regents of a synodical university, in a letter dated August 20, 1999, has
requested a ruling on the interaction of Bylaw 6.47 and Bylaw 2.27 in the case of charges of false doctrine
brought against a member of the university's faculty. The Board of Regents, having received notification
of the complaint against the faculty member, explains in its letter that it "feels responsible to determine its
role in this matter." It asks the Commission to provide a ruling on the interaction between Bylaws 2.27
and 6.47.
QUESTION: "The Board of Regents received notification of the complaint regarding (a member of the
faculty) and feels responsible to determine its role in this matter. It would be most helpful if you could
provide a ruling on the interaction between Bylaws 2.27 and 6.47 in a case like this."
OPINION: Bylaw 6.47 sets forth a detailed procedure to be followed by a Board of Regents when it
receives a complaint against a faculty member. This procedure is applicable in cases where the faculty
member is accused of false doctrine (which is a circumstance for removal from the faculty under Bylaw
139