LCMS Commission on Constitutional Matters — Minutes St. Louis, Missouri — March 9-10, 1990, Page 3

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

1. Does a district president have the constitutional authority to refuse signing a call document of
request for a teacher candidate based on the amount of salary offered in said call document?
2. Does a Director of Placement service of a synodical institution of higher education have the
authority to refuse the extending of a call for a teacher candidate based on salary offered in
the call document?
3. Does a District Board of Directors have the constitutional authority to establish entrance
salary levels for professional church workers beyond the limits of "guidelines?" In other
words can a District Board of Directors say that no calls will be issued to candidates unless
the minimum salary is offered by the calling congregation?
In responding, the Commission noted that there is no bylaw requiring the signature of the district
president before a call document is forwarded to the placement offices. It did note that there were a
number of bylaws which might speak to the issue including Bylaw 4.73 and 2.11. The first of these
speaks of the responsibility of the district president in advising congregations as to the calling of pastors
and teachers, giving them counsel and responding to requests and inquiries. Bylaw 2.11 appears to be
more pertinent when it points out that the Council of Presidents acts as the Board of Assignments and the
members are to consult the placement officers of the colleges before making the assignments. 2.11,c,
specifically states "the President of the District in which a candidate is to placed shall be consulted , and
his suggestions and recommendations shall be part of the final recommendation to the Board of
Assignments."
In responding, the Commission notes the following:
A.) While a District President may not exercise a veto, Bylaw 2.11,c, states that he is to make
suggestions and recommendations which shall be part of the final recommendation to the
Board of Assignments, presumably coming from the placement director. These
suggestions and recommendations would obviously represent his best judgment. The
responsibility for placement is that of the Council of Presidents and therefore the matter
should be referred to that body.
B.) The responsibility as noted above is that of the Council of Presidents who are to consult the
placement officer before assignments are made (2.11,b).
C.) The Board of Directors cannot say that a call will not be filled unless a minimum salary is
offered, but it may advise the district president that it believes such a call should not be
filled. The district president could accept that advice and act upon it as noted above.
26. Congregation Constitution-Lay Ministry (Ag. 1890) : A request had been received from the
Chairman of a congregational constitution committee stating that in view of action taken at the 1989
Convention of the Synod relative to certified church workers, it believed the use of the term lay ministry
in its constitution was inappropriate. It noted that congregations had been urged to use other titles in order
to avoid confusion. Reference was also made to the fact that the document had been developed on the
basis of a guideline prepared by Donald Abdon entitled "Organizing Around the Great Commission." The
Commission was asked to review the congregational constitution and to suggest possible alternative titles
for the term "lay ministry."
The secretary had provided a response to the inquirer noting that congregation constitutions are ordinarily
referred to district constitution committees since it their responsibility to review them and recommend
their approval or require their modification. It was also pointed out that the Commission would probably