LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — April 24-25, 1981, Page 4

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Relief. Dr. Les Weber and Dr. Milton Carpenter appeared before the Commission on behalf of that board
and Pastor Ed Schmidt on behalf of the Board for Missions.
In executive session the Commission adopted the following:
In view of Overture 1-16 of the Board of Directors which requests the convention to take a
position on this issue and in view of the uncertainty as to which action the convention may take
on Bylaws 2.235 and 2.423 as proposed by Task Force II, the Commission on Constitutional,
Matters take no action at this time.
It should be noted that the proposed Bylaws referred to will indicate the Board for Missions as a program
board and the new Board of Social Ministry Services as a support services board, which, if adopted,
would seem to indicate that the Board for Missions would have the programmatic responsibility.
196. Manteca (Ag. 1472): Already before the creation of the AELC the CCM had ruled that the
congregation in Manteca, California could not belong both to the LCA and the LCMS. Pastor William
Grunow had written to the effect that the District has done nothing to dissolve this arrangement, that this
joint parish has now called Rev. Fred Behrmann, and installed him as pastor. Pastor Grunow asked
whether Pastor Behrmann should be retained on the synodical roster and, if the existence of this
congregation is unconstitutional, is it possible for it to issue a valid call? The Commission decided to
reply once again that a congregation cannot hold membership in both church bodies and that a pastor
cannot hold membership in both church bodies either. However, the Commission had no evidence that the
pastor does indeed hold membership in both church bodies. It is possible under our Bylaws for an LCMS
pastor to serve a non-LCMS congregation under certain conditions. Carbon copies of our reply are to be
sent to President Orval Oswald and to Rev. Fred Behrmann.
197. Women Officers (Ag. 1474): The Secretary had answered Rev. Frederick Kempfert, chairman of the
Iowa West Constitution Committee, that under the present guidelines women are indeed not permitted to
serve as chairman of a congregation. The Commission ratified this reply.
198. Procedures for Student Discipline (Ag. 1500): Mr. Richard G. Korthals had written in behalf of the
Board of Control of Concordia College, Ann Arbor asking whether the President of the institution is the
final authority on all student appeals or whether a student can appeal the President's decision to the Board
of Control. After considerable discussion the Commission resolved to reply along the following lines:
The indicated subject of Bylaw 6.65 is descriptive: "Evangelical Discipline and the Right of
Appeal." It should be noted that the various levels of appeal are carefully spelled out in 6.65c.
The Board of-Control is not included in that series. The lists stops significantly with the
President. The Commission therefore holds that under the present Bylaws the President is the
final point of appeal.
199. UCLA Congregation and its Right to Call (Ag. 1507,A,B,C): Reverend Curtis E. Stephan asked the
Commission in behalf of his son (who carried on most of the correspondence), C. David Stephan, to
declare that the policy of the Board for Mission of the Southern California District in supplying a
missionary at large to the subsidized UCLA campus congregation is a violation of the Office of the Keys.
The Commission finally resolved to reply along the following lines:
Under the District policy a congregation is free to call its own pastor, or if it is not able
financially to do so and must depend on subsidy, it still has the right to reject the candidates
proposed by the District. We therefore see no constitutional issue in this matter. If you feel there