LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — February 1, 1985, Page 1

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Minutes of the Commission on Constitutional Matters - February 1, 1985
81. Restructure of Commission: Several months ago Dr. Carl Eberhard had tendered his resignation from
the Commission on Constitutional Matters because of age and ill health. Since that time Dr. Eberhard was
called home to be with our Lord. Dr. Bohlmann has not yet appointed a replacement for former chairman
Eberhard. In this situation it was necessary to restructure the Commission on Constitutional Matters.
Judge Schnelz served as the convener for restructuring and then was unanimously chosen as chairman. He
led the Commission members in prayer, including the family of Dr. Eberhard in the petitions offered.
Judge Schnelz suggested, and the Commission concurred, that, as an experiment, matters involving less
difficult decisions should be dealt with first, with matters involving more complicated issues being held
for discussion later in the meeting.
81. Krodel (Ag. 1730): Mr. Gottfried Krodel, a member of a congregation in Valparaiso, Indiana, had
addressed a number of questions to the Commission on Constitutional Matters. The Commission asked
the Secretary to respond to Mr. Krodel, stating that the Commission cannot entertain requests for opinions
from individual members of congregations, but must limit itself to consideration of requests from
members of the Synod in accordance with Bylaw 2.533, d. Membership in the Synod is defined in Article
V of the Constitution. Mr. Krodel should be urged to work through the district in dealing with the issues
with which he is concerned. The item is to be removed from the docket.
82. Emeritus Pastor, Eligibility for Board Membership (Ag. 1718): The Board for Evangelism Services
had asked whether an emeritus pastor was eligible for membership on a board. The Commission stated as
its opinion that there were no bylaws which would make such a pastor ineligible unless he were otherwise
engaged as an executive of a district.
83. District Bylaws: A large number of districts have prepared changes in Articles of Incorporation and
Bylaws for consideration at district conventions in 1985. In order to deal with these properly, it was
suggested that Dr. Herbert Mueller be asked to prepare a checklist of items which should be included in
such documents and that possibly at a special meeting of the Commission these documents could be
reviewed. It was further suggested that a letter be directed to all district presidents, reminding them that if
amendments to bylaws are contemplated, they must be reviewed by the Commission on Constitutional
Matters.
84. Southern California Bylaws (Ag. 1591): The Secretary was asked to correspond with the President of
the Southern California District, to remind him that the Commission is still awaiting action on suggested
changes in the district Bylaws.
85. Foundation Bylaws (Ag. 1616): Judge Groh reported that the Bylaws for the Foundation of The
Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod were in satisfactory order. He did, however, note that Article I, Section
5, should be checked for legality since it allows the members to act on any matter without a meeting if a
"consent in writing setting forth the action so taken shall be signed by two-thirds of the members." In
most states unanimous written consent would be required. He further noted that in Article II, Section 7,
and Article IV, Section 3, the trustees may act but must consult the Foundation members. The question
remains as to who has the final authority. In Article VI, it was noted that there is no provision for notice
to be given to members regarding a meeting in which bylaws may be amended. The Foundation is
requested to respond to these items and to forward any changes which may have been made since the
document was received for review.
87. Eligibility for Board Membership--Youth Services (Ag. 1725): A member of the Board for Youth
Services had served a term on the Board as a teacher representative and then as a synodical school
representative member. The question was raised as to whether it was now possible for him to serve as a