Collection › LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes (St. Louis, Missouri) › 1985–1989 › Page 2
LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — December 13, 1985, Page 2
Source: LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters minutes, file copy
⤓ Download page image (full resolution)
Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected
an overture be forwarded to the 1986 convention, allowing each congregation in a multiple parish to be
represented by a lay delegate in addition to the pastor who serves more than one congregation in the
parish. During the discussion which followed, the Commission gave attention to a paper prepared by Dr.
Schlecht dealing with the matter of congregation and parish as the words are used in the Handbook of the
Synod. At times the words appear to be interchangeable, while at other times they appear to represent
different entities. Because of this confusion, the Commission agreed to the following action:
1) All relationships should be defined in terms of congregations with references to the parish
deleted.
2) In Constitution Article V, A, the words "congregation or group of congregations served by a
single pastor" are to be substituted for the words "congregation or parish."
3) Section E of Chapter IV should be eliminated since it does not properly belong in the Bylaws,
but rather contains materials in the nature of pastoral theology related to a previous era.
4) The term "congregation" should be defined as one of the items in Bylaw 1.37.
186. South Wisconsin District Bylaws (Ag. 1764): The Bylaws of the South Wisconsin District were
approved as not being contrary to the Constitution and Bylaws of the Synod.
187. Eligibility to Enter Into Congregational Internal Affairs (Ag. 1764, A): President Arnold
Kromphardt had written to the Commission on Constitutional Matters, requesting advice in a situation in
which a pastor of the Synod stated his objection to another congregation in the Synod ministering to a
person whom he felt should not be receiving communion since she refused to discuss certain alleged
actions. The pastor had stated his intention to bring the matter to the attention of the Synod since in his
opinion the term, "church," in Matthew 18 could be interpreted as "Synod." The Commission decided to
respond to Dr. Kromphardt, stating as its opinion that this situation involves a matter of pastoral ministry
and does not implicate any Constitution or Bylaw provisions.
188. Confusion on Election of Delegates by Circuit Forum (Ag. 1765): The Commission had received a
letter from a counselor of the North Wisconsin District, indicating confusion with regard to the election of
delegates by circuit forum as referred to in Bylaw 2.05 and 4.35. He stated that it was the view of the
circuit that 2.05 should be followed as it presently reads and certain portions of 4.35 should be eliminated.
The Commission responded to the request by stating that it recognizes the difficulty and is reviewing the
matter. It may be making suggested changes in this area and will forward its suggestions to the
Commission on Structure.
189. Questions Regarding Congregational Constitutions (Ag. 1766): Rev. David Caspersen, Chairman of
the Nebraska District Constitution and Handbook Committee, had forwarded constitutions received from
Trinity Lutheran Church, Lexington, Nebraska, and Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, Fremont,
Nebraska. The questions which he asked were as follows: "Does this Constitution truly protect the rights
and powers of the congregation as traditionally placed into the hands of the voters assembly? Have these
legislative and administrative powers of the congregation been surrendered to a smaller body which is
called and defined in this Constitution and Bylaws as the Board of Directors? If the answers to these two
questions are 'yes,' can the members of the district Committee on Constitutions and Handbook approve
this Constitution and Bylaws for use by Trinity Lutheran Church, Lexington, Nebraska, for their use or
for a member congregation of the Synod?" A further question was asked as to whether, "Can a pastor be
removed from office as an act of expediency and such removal still not be considered 'an act of discipline'
as is stated in Part F of this article and section of the Bylaws? Is both the pastoral office and the individual
holding that office being truly protected by these provisions of the Bylaws as set forth by the members of
Good Shepherd Lutheran Church, Fremont, Nebraska?"