LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — August 10–12, 2012, Page 4

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

•
•
•
•

•
•
•

Under 8.10: Consideration to Synod Bylaw 1.5.3.2 to properly track the language used by the
bylaw.
In Appendix B, under paragraph (f) (4): It should be clarified that it is the Synod’s Standard
Operating Procedures Manual and Bylaws that are being referenced.
In Appendix B, under 2.382: Reference should be made to Synod Bylaws 1.5.6 and 1.5.6.1.
In Appendix B, under 2.384: The word “allege” should read “alleged.” Similarly, under 2.385,
the paragraph beginning “Second,” the word “report” should read “reports.” And again, under
2.385 at the end of the paragraph beginning “Third,….” the word “if” in the final sentence should
read “it.”
In Appendix B, under 2.385, the commission wonders whether no “specific time period” is given
for a reason or whether a specific time period is intended to be provided.
Under the Governance Committee Charter: The first sentence under the “Membership” section
lacks a period at the end of the sentence.
Under the Personnel Committee Charter: #10 under “Responsibilities” lacks a space between the
words “or” and “external.”

152. Prior Approval of CUS Theological Faculty (12-2643)
In a May 4, 2012, emailed letter, the interim executive director of the Board of Directors of Concordia
University System indicated a problem and then asked two questions of the commission.
In accord with Bylaw 3.9.2.2 (b), the commission notified the boards of regents of the Synod’s colleges
and universities, the boards of regents of the seminaries, and the Synod President, allowing them to
submit in writing information regarding the matters at issue. Prior to finalizing this opinion, the
commission also consulted with the Commission on Handbook, given that commission’s conventionmandated responsibility to participate in updating the 2010 Handbook (2010 Res. 8-12A) and to bring it
into harmony with resolutions and changes adopted by the Synod’s conventions (Bylaw 3.9.4.2 [b]).
Problem: Editions of the Handbook prior to 2010 contained the following statement:
3.8.3.4 In keeping with the objectives and the Constitution, Bylaws, and resolutions of the Synod,
the Board for University Education shall…
(f) Grant approval for initial appointments of theological faculty;….
This paragraph is not contained in the 2010 Handbook. However, the policy is stated in the section on
faculty in older editions of the Handbook as well as the current edition.
Question 1: What is the correct text of the Handbook with regard to prior approval of theology faculty
members?
Opinion: The following portion of Bylaw 3.10.5.6.3 should be stricken: “All initial appointments to
college/university theology faculties shall require the prior approval of the Board of Directors of
Concordia University System.” The following sentence should be amended to read: “All other initial fulltime appointments to college/university faculties shall require prior approval of the board of regents and
shall include a thorough theological review involving the district president and selected members of the
boards of regents.”
Prior to (and since) the 2010 Synod convention, the boards of regents of the Synod’s colleges and
universities as well as the Synod’s seminaries had the responsibility to appoint all full-time members of
the faculty, including theological faculty. Prior to the 2010 Synod convention, the Board for University
293