LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — August 17, 1984, Page 3

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

64. Executive Sessions (Ag. 1709, A) : A request had been received for the interpretation of Bylaw 2.67,
1 which provides for provision of verbatim transcripts of Board of Regents' minutes unless they have
been designated as executive sessions. In a related question, the Commission was asked to rule on
whether personnel matters dealt with in board of regents' meetings are considered as executive sessions or
whether they must be specifically designated as such. The Commission responded as follows:
a) Since there are no bylaws covering this question, all boards are autonomous and the board is
the sole determiner of when it is in executive session.
b) Since each board is autonomous, it is not subject to procedures of prior boards. Past
procedure is not binding on current boards.
c) Any official action must, of course, be recorded.
In response to the first question, it was stated that the questioner is entitled to a copy of the minutes, with
the exception of those portions which are determined by the board to be executive session.
65. Eligibility of Robert Preus--Board for Mission Services (Ag. 1668, A-E): The Commission had
previously ruled that Dr. Robert Preus was ineligible to serve on the Board for Mission Services, on the
basis of Bylaw 2.67, h, and related bylaws describing the President of a seminary as the Executive Officer
of the Board of Regents. Dr. Preus had requested reconsideration of this ruling by the Commission, had
indicated that additional data would be provided for consideration, had failed to provide the additional
data, and had further requested the Commission to rule on a number of questions. In addition, had
requested permission to appear before the Commission with counsel at a future meeting. In response, the
Commission decided to reply that the Commission had met and wished to point out the following:
That in a letter of June 19, Dr. Preus was requested, pursuant to his letter of June 15, to present
his data for forwarding to the Commission members for their consideration, presuming that it
was -based on new or additional information. To date this has not occurred.
In a letter of July 24 Dr. Preus further asked the Commission to render a ruling which has previously
occurred. The real question, in essence, involves his right of appeal or, although the term was not used by
him, reconsideration.
As regards appeal, the Commission rules that the only appeal available from a decision of the
Commission is to a synodical convention. Until such time the opinion of the Commission on
Constitutional Matters is binding on the question decided.
It further ruled that the effect of the decision is to remove Dr. Preus at once from the Board for Mission
Services which, in effect, answers all the questions raised by him.
With regard to reconsideration, out of courtesy and respect, however, the Commission did review its
decision and found no reason to revise it.
66. Role of Women (Ag. 1708, A) : A District President had asked whether it would be possible and
permissible for a congregation to define the functions of all of its offices to be "tasks providing a service
for the good of the whole congregation" rather than as "positions established for the exercise of
authority." If this were done, would it be possible for women to serve as elders? The Commission decided
to respond as follows: