LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — August 9–11, 2013, Page 10

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

•
•

Bylaw 6.001, paragraph d, retains wording that should have been deleted when the new paragraph
“e” was added to the bylaw.
Bylaw 6.003 continues to speak of “a majority of the voting members present” when it must, in
keeping with Synod Bylaw 3.12.4.2 (d), instead require “a majority of all votes cast.”

234. University President Search Committee (13-2686)
Via a July 24, 2013 email, the commission was presented with a question relative to the application of
2013 Res. 5-09 as amended and adopted on July 24 by the 2013 LCMS convention. A search committee
for the selection of a college/university president for one of the Synod’s universities had been formulated
under the provisions of Bylaw 3.10.5.5.2 (b) (1) prior to the adoption of Res. 5-09. Included as members
of this search committee were staff and faculty members who are not “members of LCMS
congregations,” as is now required by the amendment to Bylaw 3.10.5.5.2 (b) (1) by the passage of Res.
5-09.
Question:

“In light of 2013 Resolution 5-09 as amended, must the Presidential Search Committee be reconstituted?”
Opinion: Contained within this question are the following more specific issues: (1) Upon amendment of
a bylaw by the Synod in convention, when do such amendments become effective? (2) Having been
formulated under the provisions of the Bylaw 3.10.5.5.2 (b) (1) prior to its amendment, may the search
committee continue to fulfill the tasks assigned to it as it is presently constituted, or must it now replace
the members who are not “members of LCMS congregations” with individuals who are such members?
An amendment to a bylaw becomes effective upon adoption unless a specific provision has been made
otherwise. Nothing contained in the Bylaws of the Synod indicates the contrary, and on the occasion that
the commission has had to address similar questions it has indicated the same. See generally, Ag. 1860
(July 6–13, 1989) concerning a vacancy to have been filled by a board of regents.
Although a governing body can certainly include a provision in amending its bylaws whereby
circumstances existing before the amendment are “grandfathered” and allowed to continue under specific
terms, these terms must be specifically stated. Nothing to this effect was done in the adoption of Res. 5-09
amending Bylaw 3.10.5.5.2 (b) (1), which now reads:
A search committee shall be formed that represents the board of regents, the faculty, and the staff. Faculty
members and staff members on the committee shall be members of LCMS congregations. [Underlined words
represent the new language by amendment.]

On two separate occasions the commission has dealt with questions under similar circumstances. In 1986
an individual had been elected by the Synod in convention to serve on the Commission on Theology and
Church Relations based on his status as a “parish pastor.” This individual subsequently retired, his roster
status thereby changed to “emeritus.” With his status changed, he was clearly ineligible for re-election;
however, the commission was asked whether he could be allowed to serve out the remainder of his term.
The commission noted that where an individual had been placed in a position by reason of his status, it
had been consistently determined that such an individual is no longer eligible to continue in that position
(Ag. 1872, Sept. 29–30, 1989). Similarly, in 1996 an individual had been elected to the Board of
Directors of the Synod based on his status as a lay member. At that same convention the delegates
approved an action which changed the individual’s status to that of a minister of religion—
commissioned. Noting that the Bylaws of the Synod contained no grandfathering provision that would
allow the individual to continue serving on the Board of Directors despite the fact that the same
CCM Minutes – August 9-11, 2013 – Page 388