LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — October 1-2, 1970, Page 2

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

of suffrage. The commission ruled that in view of the language of the Constitution in Article V, A which
speaks of "every congregation or parish," the Bylaw which states that two or more congregations being
served by one pastor shall be regarded as one parish entitled to only one set of delegates is not contrary to
the Constitution (Agenda 181). (Bylaw 3.17).
227. Guidelines for Election of Delegates: Secretary Mueller had mailed to all District Secretaries for the
use of Counselors guidelines for the election of delegates to the Milwaukee convention. Guideline No. 6
stated that if on the original write-in ballot one individual or congregation received majority support, it
would not be necessary to proceed to the device of another ballot with two names or congregations listed.
The commission approved the letter which the Secretary had sent to Secretary Phipps of the Colorado
District who had raised a question concerning the propriety of this procedure. Secretary Mueller had
indicated that if in any circuit meeting this procedure is seriously challenged it might be best to take the
intervening step. In a separate motion the Commission approved the Guidelines sent out by the Secretary,
including Guideline No. 6, in order to preclude the possibility of anyone raising the question of the
constitutionality of any election of delegates which, because majority support had been secured already in
the write-in ballot, had been concluded at that particular stage. But the commission also decided to place
on the agenda for further study the whole procedure of electing delegates. (Agenda 182).
228. Election Procedures for President and First Vice-President: Dr. Paul Streufert and Lewis Niemoeller
presented the results of the work of the ad hoc committee which is to propose new procedures for the
election of President and First Vice-President. They requested the reactions of the Commission. These
were given during a paragraph by paragraph review. Several suggestions were offered though no formal
action was deemed necessary. Principal features: Nominations by congregations; the right of the
convention to amend the slate by substitution, addition, or deletion; the publication of biographical
information on the 5 highest candidates in the Workbook; listing in the Workbook of all other candidates
who have received at least five nominations for either position; the retention of the 4 highest candidates
after the initial balloting. The Commission seemed to feel that no constitutional amendment would be
necessary as long as the convention retained final control over the slate of candidates through the
unrestricted right of completely revising the slate by amendments duly made, seconded, and carried.
229. Fact-Finding Committee: In view of the fact that President Preus announced intention to use a fact
finding committee had raised constitutional questions in some quarters, President Preus in a formal
communication requested the commission to look once again at the constitutionality of this procedure
with special reference to six questions listed (Agenda 206). Dr. Tietjen made a presentation lasting well
over an hour in which he stated among other things that it was his feeling that the President is obligated to
operate through existing channels, in this instance, the Board of Control. Dr. Ahlschwede was also invited
to appear before the commission on the following day. He expressed the opinion that even though he
would wish the President to use the Board of Control he felt that the proposed procedure could not be
called unconstitutional. Dr. Preus also made a personal presentation and answered questions. Already at
the conclusion of the first day's session, after the appearance of Dr. Tietjen, it had been decided to have
Kuenne prepare a rough draft of a reply which could be carefully evaluated on the following day. This
was done. After revision the letter (attached to the minutes) was adopted as the commission's answer to
the request from Dr. Preus listing the six specific concerns.
230. Michigan District Bylaws: Kuenne distributed a copy to each member. (Agenda 210)
231. Board of Appeals Rules of Procedure: These were also distributed (Agenda 10).
232. Guidelines: Kuenne also made available a copy of Guidelines and the mimeo insert now being
mailed with the booklet. He reported that he and the secretary had come to the conclusion that it would be