LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — March 7-8, 1968, Page 1

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

some time and that it was his intention to begin with those groups which had previously been subjected to
doctrinal censorship (this would not include the Walther League).
110. Opinion Re Otten: The Commission decided that if Herman Otten should ask for a copy of the
Commission's opinion addressed to the St. Louis faculty, the reply should be to the effect that technically
he was not entitled to receive a copy but that, since any member could ask in his behalf, we would grant
his request and send him a copy. It was also suggested that if it should become necessary to have
something appear in the Reporter, Kuenne and Mueller could consult with the other members of the
Commission.
111. Otten as Pastoral Delegate: President Scherer of the Western District had asked whether it would be
necessary to recognize Herman Otten as the pastoral delegate of the New Haven congregation to the
District convention. The Commission decided upon a negative answer, with Sommermeyer making the
preliminary draft of the reply. On the following day the reply was finalized as follows:
"May one of the two votes of a congregation, namely the pastoral vote, be assigned to the pastor of a
congregation even though he is not a member of the Synod?
The Synod's Commission on Constitutional Matters holds that such a person may not be seated as a
voting pastoral delegate at a District convention for the following reasons:
1. The Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod require or assume throughout that pastors of congregations
holding voting membership in the Synod be qualified pastoral members of the Synod (see Article V, A
and Article VI, 3, 6, and 7. Also Bylaws 3.17, x+.15, x+.17).
2. One of the objects of the Synod, Article III, 7, is the supervision of the ministers with regard to the
performance of their official duties. The Synod could hardly supervise a pastor who is not qualified as a
member and could not permit him to vote.
3. In any organization the right to vote is one of the most important privileges of membership. The Synod
has established stringent requirements for membership on the part of congregations and on the part of
pastors. It is therefore unthinkable that the Synod should extend this highly treasured privilege of voting
to one who fails to meet the requirements of membership.
May we remind you that this opinion has binding force until it is overruled by a synodical convention (see
2.107 e)."
112. New Haven Questions: Dr. Harms, accompanied by Dr. Wolbrecht, appeared before the Commission
to relay his deep concern over the problems raised by the recent Board of Appeals decision in the New
Haven case. Is the President powerless to act when in his estimation a board or commission has erred?
May a congregation call as a pastor a man who is not certified by the Synod? Can an Appeals Board
enlarge the case before it? What can the President do when a Board of Appeals has given the wrong
answer or has answered the wrong question? He indicated that he would submit in writing a specific
question or questions.
113. Lowering Voting Membership Age to 18: President Victor Behnken of the Southern California
District had asked whether a congregation could in its constitution lower the voting age to 18. The
Commission decided upon a threefold reply: 1. Nothing in the Constitution or Bylaws of the Synod would
make this impossible; 2. However, in each instance all of the legal ramifications should be carefully
checked; 3. Congregations may well consider the age of 18 to be of sufficient maturity for a young man to