# LCMS Convention Workbook_St. Louis Missouri_1973_S185
# Machine transcription, uncorrected — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

SYNODICAL ADMINISTRATION 185

1. Five voting members elected by the synodical conven-
tion: two pastors, one teacher, and two laymen;

2. Five voting members appointed by the President of
the Synod in consultation with the Vice-Presidents:
two laymen, two members, one from each of the theo-
logical seminaries, and one member from a college
which confers the baccalaureate degree in teacher ed-
ucation.

3. One advisory member, who shall be the President of
the Synod or his representative.

4. That the Nominations Committee of the Synod be in-
structed to provide for the election of two pastors, one
teacher, and two laymen at this convention, keeping
in mind the value of some continuity with the present
membership of the Commission on Mission and Min-
istry in the Church.

L. C. Wuerffel, Chairman
M. L. Kretzmann, Consultant

4-09

Report of Ad Hoc Committee to Review
the Appellate Process

Milwaukee Resolution 5-14 resolved, among other things,
that a study committee composed of members of the Board
of Appeals and Commission on Constitutional Matters be
appointed by the President of the Synod to review the appel-
late process — and to report to the next convention.

In accordance with this resolution President Preus ap-
pointed such a committee, and on Jan. 12, 1972, its one and
only meeting was held. Present were Mr. George Haessler,
representing the Board of Appeals; Rev. E. O. Luessenhop
and Dr. Herbert Mueller, representing the Commission on
Constitutional Matters. Also present was Mr. Phil Draheim,
Synod’s attorney, in an advisory capacity and as a resource
person.

Much attention was devoted to Bylaw 5.15 with particular
reference to the following sentence: “During the period of
suspension a member shall be relieved (i) of his duties (but
not his rights) as a member of the Synod and (ii) of the
duties and responsibilities of his position with the Synod
or with a District of the Synod, or with an organization
owned and controlled by the Synod.”

The committee was somewhat puzzled by the parentheti-
cal statement “but not his rights.” Which rights? His right
of appeal? His right of claiming his pension? What other
rights might be included?

It was the consensus of the committee that the “rights”
referred to in 5.15 were not confined to matters of appeal.
The committee therefore felt that Handbook paragraph 5.15
could well remain as it is.

Another area of attention had to do with Handbook para-
graphs 5.21b and 5.25. Synod’s attorney was asked to pre-
pare a Handbook revision, not by way of substantial change,
but simply for purposes of clarification.

The proposed Bylaw revision follows:

5.25 Jurisdiction of the Synodical Commission

The synodical Commission on Adjudication shall
have jurisdiction in the following situations:

a. All matters in which the Synod itself is a
party

b. All matters in which a District of the Synod
is a party EXCEPT

1. Cases involving expulsion under Article XIII
of the Constitution;

2. Cases in which a person, whether or not a
member of the Synod. is removed from the position
which he holds with that District of the Synod;

3. Cases involving that District and a congrega-
tion within that District.

Each of these exceptions shall be handled by
the Commission of Adjudication of the District in
which the person or congregation involved held his
or its synodical membership.

c. All matters in which an organization owned
and controlled by the Synod is a party.

d. All matters in which a person, whether or

not a member of the Synod, holding a position
with either the Synod or an organization owned
and controlled by the Synod, is a party EXCEPT

1. Cases involving procedural questions in ex-
communication, which shall always be handled by
the Commission of Adjudication of the District in
which exists the congregation which is responsible
for the excommunication.

2. Cases involving expulsion under Article XII
of the Constitution, which shall be handled by
such Districts’ Commissions of Adjudication.

e. All matters involving members of the Synod
who hold, and who held at the time of the occur-
rence which gives rise to the controversy, their
synodical membership in different Districts.

E. O. Luessenhop, Secretary

4-10A

Report of 125th Anniversary Committee

Already at the Detroit convention in 1965, the LCMS ex-
pressed its desire to observe its 125th anniversary by a reso-
lution which authorized the observance of the 125th anni-
versary of the organization of the LCMS.

The second official action with regard to the anniversary
celebration was taken in 1967, when a resolution calling for
immediate appointment of a 125th anniversary committee
was passed unanimously. In accordance with this resolution
the President of the Synod appointed a committee of seven
members: Dr. William A. Buege, Chairman, Mrs. Ray Hodges,
Secretary. Rev. Martin Brauer, Messrs. Clifford Halter, Wm.
C. Schmidtke, Herbert W. Schuppan, and Rev. Walter Uhlig.
The Board of Directors selected three of its own members
to augment this committee and to establish effective liaison
between the committee and the Board of Directors. These
were: Rev. Gerhardt E. Nitz, D.D., Mr. Carl W. Muhlen-
bruch (1972), Mr. Gus Melde, and Dr. Alvin W. Mueller
(1973). Included as advisory members were Dr. Milton Car-
penter, Dr. Herbert Mueller, and Dr. Roland Wiederaenders
from the Board of Directors. Other advisory members were
Dr. Arthur M. Ahlschwede, Rev. A. Lorenz Grumm, Dr. Wil-
liam H. Kohn, Dr. Erwin Kolb, Dr. Arthur L. Miller (1972),
and Mr. Melvin Kieschnick (1973), all of whom are executive
secretaries respectively of the Boards for Higher Education,
Stewardship, Missions, Evangelism, and Parish Education.

The Director

Prior to the 1971 convention in Milwaukee the Board of
Directors asked Dr. Oliver R. Harms to give direction to the
anniversary observance. Dr. Harms defined a series of formal
assumptions which he regarded as basic to a meaningful
celebration and after the Board of Directors declared itself
in full accord with these assumptions, Dr. Harms agreed to
serve in the capacity of Director of the 125th anniversary
observance.

These same assumptions were also stated in detail to the
1971 convention which, by its demonstration, if not by reso-
lution, agreed to the assumptions. Briefly stated, the assump~-
tions called for an outreach to the community with the Gos-
pel and special services plus the expression of gratitude
through a Thankoffering.

The assumptions are the following:

1. We assume in this observance, as in all of its life, that
our Synod seeks to be church. Church is always God com-
ing to His people. And church is always the people of God
coming together. If our 425th anniversary observance is any~-
thing at all it must be worship where God gets at us with
His grace and where we respond to forgiveness, salvation,
and life in Christ. Our observance begins when we build
one another up in faith and unity for mission and ministry.
Our glory in 1972 is that God has been among us for 125
years and that we can count on Him to continue to be with
us for the sake of His grace.

2. We assume that the Synod wants a special observance
because we have a worthy purpose in mind. In other words,
a special observance should stimulate the membership to be
doing more and better what God wants His people to be